draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-11.txt | draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-12.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
DMM H. Chan, Ed. | DMM H. Chan, Ed. | |||
Internet-Draft X. Wei | Internet-Draft X. Wei | |||
Intended status: Informational Huawei Technologies | Intended status: Informational Huawei Technologies | |||
Expires: March 2, 2019 J. Lee | Expires: August 2, 2019 J. Lee | |||
Sangmyung University | Sangmyung University | |||
S. Jeon | S. Jeon | |||
Sungkyunkwan University | Sungkyunkwan University | |||
CJ. Bernardos, Ed. | CJ. Bernardos, Ed. | |||
UC3M | UC3M | |||
August 29, 2018 | January 29, 2019 | |||
Distributed Mobility Anchoring | Distributed Mobility Anchoring | |||
draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-11 | draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-12 | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
This document defines distributed mobility anchoring in terms of the | This document defines distributed mobility anchoring in terms of the | |||
different configurations and functions to provide IP mobility | different configurations and functions to provide IP mobility | |||
support. A network may be configured with distributed mobility | support. A network may be configured with distributed mobility | |||
anchoring functions for both network-based or host-based mobility | anchoring functions for both network-based or host-based mobility | |||
support according to the needs of mobility support. In the | support according to the needs of mobility support. In a distributed | |||
distributed mobility anchoring environment, multiple anchors are | mobility anchoring environment, multiple anchors are available for | |||
available for mid-session switching of an IP prefix anchor. To start | mid-session switching of an IP prefix anchor. To start a new flow or | |||
a new flow or to handle a flow not requiring IP session continuity as | to handle a flow not requiring IP session continuity as a mobile node | |||
a mobile node moves to a new network, the flow can be started or re- | moves to a new network, the flow can be started or re-started using | |||
started using a new IP address configured from the new IP prefix | an IP address configured from the new IP prefix anchored to the new | |||
which is anchored to the new network. The mobility functions and | network. If the flow needs to survive the change of network, there | |||
their operations and parameters are general for different | are solutions that can be used to enable IP address mobility. This | |||
configurations. | document describes different anchoring approaches, depending on the | |||
IP mobility needs, and how this IP address mobility is handled by the | ||||
network. | ||||
Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 2, 2019. | ||||
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 2, 2019. | ||||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
skipping to change at page 2, line 39 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 40 ¶ | |||
Mobility Support Only When Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | Mobility Support Only When Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP | 4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP | |||
prefix/address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | prefix/address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
4.2. Mobility case, traffic redirection . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 4.2. Mobility case, traffic redirection . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
A key requirement in distributed mobility management [RFC7333] is to | A key requirement in distributed mobility management [RFC7333] is to | |||
enable traffic to avoid traversing a single mobility anchor far from | enable traffic to avoid traversing a single mobility anchor far from | |||
an optimal route. This document defines different configurations, | an optimal route. This document defines different configurations, | |||
functional operations and parameters for distributed mobility | functional operations and parameters for distributed mobility | |||
anchoring and explains how to use them to make the route changes to | anchoring and explains how to use them to avoid unnecessarily long | |||
avoid unnecessarily long routes. | routes when a mobile node moves. | |||
Companion distributed mobility management documents are already | Companion distributed mobility management documents are already | |||
addressing the architecture and deployment | addressing the architecture and deployment | |||
[I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models], source address selection | [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models], source address selection | |||
[I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility], and control-plane data-plane | [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility], and control-plane data-plane | |||
signaling [I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp]. A number of distributed mobility | signaling [I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp]. A number of distributed mobility | |||
solutions have also been proposed, for example, in | solutions have also been proposed, for example, in | |||
[I-D.seite-dmm-dma], [I-D.bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif], | [I-D.seite-dmm-dma], [I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif], | |||
[I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi], [I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring], and | [I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi], [I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring], and | |||
[I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc]. | [I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc]. | |||
Distributed mobility anchoring employs multiple anchors in the data | Distributed mobility anchoring employs multiple anchors in the data | |||
plane. In general, control plane functions may be separated from | plane. In general, control plane functions may be separated from | |||
data plane functions and be centralized but may also be co-located | data plane functions and be centralized but may also be co-located | |||
with the data plane functions at the distributed anchors. Different | with the data plane functions at the distributed anchors. Different | |||
configurations of distributed mobility anchoring are described in | configurations of distributed mobility anchoring are described in | |||
Section 3.1. | Section 3.1. | |||
skipping to change at page 3, line 33 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 35 ¶ | |||
may then configure a global IPv6 address from this prefix and use it | may then configure a global IPv6 address from this prefix and use it | |||
as the source IP address in a flow to communicate with its | as the source IP address in a flow to communicate with its | |||
correspondent node (CN). When there are multiple mobility anchors | correspondent node (CN). When there are multiple mobility anchors | |||
assigned to the same MN, an address selection for a given flow is | assigned to the same MN, an address selection for a given flow is | |||
first required before the flow is initiated. Using an anchor in a | first required before the flow is initiated. Using an anchor in a | |||
MN's network of attachment has the advantage that the packets can | MN's network of attachment has the advantage that the packets can | |||
simply be forwarded according to the forwarding table. However, | simply be forwarded according to the forwarding table. However, | |||
after the flow has been initiated, the MN may later move to another | after the flow has been initiated, the MN may later move to another | |||
network which assigns a new mobility anchor to the MN. Since the new | network which assigns a new mobility anchor to the MN. Since the new | |||
anchor is located in a different network, the MN's assigned prefix | anchor is located in a different network, the MN's assigned prefix | |||
and the built MN IP address do not belong to the network where the MN | does not belong to the network where the MN is currently attached. | |||
is currently attached. | ||||
When the MN wants to continue using its assigned prefix and IP | When the MN wants to continue using its assigned prefix to complete | |||
address to complete ongoing data sessions after it moved to a new | ongoing data sessions after it has moved to a new network, the | |||
network, the network needs to provide support for IP address- and | network needs to provide support for the MN's IP address -- and | |||
session continuity, since routing packets to the MN through the new | session continuity, since routing packets to the MN through the new | |||
network deviates from applying default routes. The IP session | network deviates from applying default routes. The IP session | |||
continuity needs of a flow (application) determines the how the IP | continuity needs of a flow (application) determines how the IP | |||
address used by the traffic of this flow has to be anchored. If the | address used by this flow has to be anchored. If the ongoing IP flow | |||
ongoing IP flow can cope with an IP prefix/address change, the flow | can cope with an IP prefix/address change, the flow can be | |||
can be reinitiated with a new IP address anchored in the new network. | reinitiated with a new IP address anchored in the new network. On | |||
On the other hand, if the ongoing IP flow cannot cope with such | the other hand, if the ongoing IP flow cannot cope with such change, | |||
change, mobility support is needed. A network supporting a mix of | mobility support is needed. A network supporting a mix of flows both | |||
flows both requiring and not requiring IP mobility support will need | requiring and not requiring IP mobility support will need to | |||
to distinguish these flows. | distinguish these flows. | |||
2. Conventions and Terminology | 2. Conventions and Terminology | |||
All general mobility-related terms and their acronyms used in this | All general mobility-related terms and their acronyms used in this | |||
document are to be interpreted as defined in the Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) | document are to be interpreted as defined in the Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) | |||
base specification [RFC6275], the Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) | base specification [RFC6275], the Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) | |||
specification [RFC5213], the "Mobility Related Terminologies" | specification [RFC5213], the "Mobility Related Terminologies" | |||
[RFC3753], and the DMM current practices and gap analysis [RFC7429]. | [RFC3753], and the DMM current practices and gap analysis [RFC7429]. | |||
These include terms such as mobile node (MN), correspondent node | These include terms such as mobile node (MN), correspondent node | |||
(CN), home agent (HA), home address (HoA), care-of-address (CoA), | (CN), home agent (HA), home address (HoA), care-of-address (CoA), | |||
local mobility anchor (LMA), and mobile access gateway (MAG). | local mobility anchor (LMA), and mobile access gateway (MAG). | |||
In addition, this document uses the following terms: | In addition, this document uses the following terms: | |||
Home network of a home address: the network that has assigned the | Home network of a home address: the network that has assigned the | |||
HoA used as the session identifier by the application running in | HoA used as the session identifier by the application running in | |||
an MN. The MN may be running multiple application sessions, and | an MN. The MN may be running multiple application sessions, and | |||
each of these sessions can have a different home network. | each of these sessions can have a different home network. | |||
Anchor (of an IP prefix/address): An IP prefix, i.e., Home Network | Anchoring (of an IP prefix/address): An IP prefix, i.e., Home | |||
Prefix (HNP), or address, i.e., HoA, assigned for use by an MN is | Network Prefix (HNP), or address, i.e., HoA, assigned for use by | |||
topologically anchored to an anchor node when the anchor node is | an MN is topologically anchored to an anchor node when the anchor | |||
able to advertise a connected route into the routing | node is able to advertise a connected route into the routing | |||
infrastructure for the assigned IP prefix. The traffic using the | infrastructure for the assigned IP prefix. The traffic using the | |||
assigned IP address/prefix must traverse the anchor node. We can | assigned IP address/prefix must traverse the anchor node. We can | |||
refer to the function performed by IP anchor node as anchoring, | refer to the function performed by IP anchor node as anchoring, | |||
which is a data plane function. | which is a data plane function. | |||
Location Management (LM) function: control plane function that keeps | Location Management (LM) function: control plane function that keeps | |||
and manages the network location information of an MN. The | and manages the network location information of an MN. The | |||
location information may be a binding of the advertised IP | location information may be a binding of the advertised IP | |||
address/prefix, e.g., HoA or HNP, to the IP routing address of the | address/prefix, e.g., HoA or HNP, to the IP routing address of the | |||
MN or of a node that can forward packets destined to the MN. | MN or of a node that can forward packets destined to the MN. | |||
When the MN is a mobile router (MR) providing a mobile network of | When the MN is a mobile router (MR), the location information will | |||
mobile network nodes (MNN), the location information will also | also include the mobile network prefix (MNP), which is the | |||
include the mobile network prefix (MNP), which is the aggregate IP | aggregate IP prefix delegated to the MR to assign IP prefixes for | |||
prefix delegated to the MR to assign IP prefixes for use by the | use by the mobile network nodes (MNNs) in the mobile network. | |||
MNNs in the mobile network. | ||||
In a client-server protocol model, location query and update | In a client-server protocol model, location query and update | |||
messages may be exchanged between a Location Management client | messages may be exchanged between a Location Management client | |||
(LMc) and a Location Management server (LMs), where the location | (LMc) and a Location Management server (LMs), where the location | |||
information can be updated to or queried from the LMc. | information can be updated to or queried from the LMc. | |||
Optionally, there may be a Location Management proxy (LMp) between | Optionally, there may be a Location Management proxy (LMp) between | |||
LMc and LMs. | LMc and LMs. | |||
With separation of control plane and data plane, the LM function | With separation of control plane and data plane, the LM function | |||
is in the control plane. It may be a logical function at the | is in the control plane. It may be a logical function at the | |||
skipping to change at page 5, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 44 ¶ | |||
consider architectures in which the control and data planes are | consider architectures in which the control and data planes are | |||
separated, as described in [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models]. | separated, as described in [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models]. | |||
3.1.1. Network-based DMM | 3.1.1. Network-based DMM | |||
Figure 1 shows a general scenario for network-based distributed | Figure 1 shows a general scenario for network-based distributed | |||
mobility management. | mobility management. | |||
The main characteristics of a network-based DMM solution are: | The main characteristics of a network-based DMM solution are: | |||
o There are multiple data plane anchors (i.e., DPA instances), each | o There are multiple data plane anchors, each with a FM-DP function. | |||
with a FM-DP function. | ||||
o The control plane may either be distributed (not shown in the | o The control plane may either be distributed (not shown in the | |||
figure) or centralized (as shown in the figure). | figure) or centralized (as shown in the figure). | |||
o The control plane and the data plane (Control Plane Anchor -- CPA | o The control plane and the data plane (Control Plane Anchor -- CPA | |||
-- and Data Plane Anchor -- DPA) may be co-located or not. If the | -- and Data Plane Anchor -- DPA) may be co-located or not. If the | |||
CPA is co-located with the distributed DPAs, then there are | CPA is co-located with the distributed DPAs, then there are | |||
multiple co-located CPA-DPA instances (not shown in the figure). | multiple co-located CPA-DPA instances (not shown in the figure). | |||
o An IP prefix/address IP1 (anchored to the DPA with IP address | o An IP prefix/address IP1 (anchored to the DPA with IP address | |||
IPa1) is assigned for use to a MN. The MN uses this IP1 address | IPa1) is assigned for use to a MN. The MN uses this IP1 address | |||
to communicate with CNs (not shown in the figure). | to communicate with CNs (not shown in the figure). | |||
o The location management (LM) function may be co-located or split | o The location management (LM) function may be co-located or split | |||
skipping to change at page 7, line 37 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 37 ¶ | |||
Figure 2: Client-based DMM configuration | Figure 2: Client-based DMM configuration | |||
4. IP Mobility Handling in Distributed Anchoring Environments - | 4. IP Mobility Handling in Distributed Anchoring Environments - | |||
Mobility Support Only When Needed | Mobility Support Only When Needed | |||
IP mobility support may be provided only when needed instead of being | IP mobility support may be provided only when needed instead of being | |||
provided by default. Three cases can be considered: | provided by default. Three cases can be considered: | |||
o Nomadic case: no address continuity is required. The IP address | o Nomadic case: no address continuity is required. The IP address | |||
used by the MN changes after movement and traffic using old | used by the MN changes after a movement and traffic using the old | |||
address is disrupted. If session continuity is required, then it | address is disrupted. If session continuity is required, then it | |||
needs to be provided by a solution running at L4 or above. | needs to be provided by a solution running at L4 or above. | |||
o Mobility case, traffic redirection: address continuity is | o Mobility case, traffic redirection: address continuity is | |||
required. When the MN moves, the previous anchor still anchors | required. When the MN moves, the previous anchor still anchors | |||
traffic using the old IP address, and forwards it to the new MN's | the traffic using the old IP address, and forwards it to the new | |||
location. The MN obtains a new IP address anchored at the new | MN's location. The MN obtains a new IP address anchored to the | |||
location, and preferably uses it for new communications, | new location, and preferably uses it for new communications, | |||
established while connected at the new location. | established while connected at the new location. | |||
o Mobility case, anchor relocation: address continuity is required. | o Mobility case, anchor relocation: address continuity is required. | |||
In this case the route followed by the traffic is optimized, by | In this case the route followed by the traffic is optimized, by | |||
using some means for traffic indirection to deviate from default | using some means for traffic indirection to deviate from default | |||
routes. | routes. | |||
A straightforward choice of mobility anchoring is the following: the | A straightforward choice of mobility anchoring is the following: the | |||
MN's chooses as source IP address of packets belonging to an IP flow, | MN's chooses as source IP address for packets belonging to an IP | |||
an address allocated by the network the MN is attached to when the | flow, an address allocated by the network the MN is attached to when | |||
flow was initiated. As such, traffic belonging to this flow | the flow was initiated. As such, traffic belonging to this flow | |||
traverses the MN's mobility anchor [I-D.seite-dmm-dma] | traverses the MN's mobility anchor [I-D.seite-dmm-dma] | |||
[I-D.bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif]. | [I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif]. | |||
The IP prefix/address at the MN's side of a flow may be anchored at | The IP prefix/address at the MN's side of a flow may be anchored to | |||
the access router to which the MN is attached. For example, when a | the access router to which the MN is attached. For example, when a | |||
MN attaches to a network (Net1) or moves to a new network (Net2), an | MN attaches to a network (Net1) or moves to a new network (Net2), an | |||
IP prefix from the attached network is assigned to the MN's | IP prefix from the attached network is assigned to the MN's | |||
interface. In addition to configuring new link-local addresses, the | interface. In addition to configuring new link-local addresses, the | |||
MN configures from this prefix an IP address which is typically a | MN configures from this prefix an IP address which is typically a | |||
dynamic IP address. It then uses this IP address when a flow is | dynamic IP address. It then uses this IP address when a flow is | |||
initiated. Packets to the MN in this flow are simply forwarded | initiated. Packets from this flow addressed to the MN are simply | |||
according to the forwarding table. | forwarded according to the forwarding table. | |||
There may be multiple IP prefixes/addresses that an MN can select | There may be multiple IP prefixes/addresses that an MN can select | |||
when initiating a flow. They may be from the same access network or | when initiating a flow. They may be from the same access network or | |||
different access networks. The network may advertise these prefixes | different access networks. The network may advertise these prefixes | |||
with cost options [I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] so that the mobile node | with cost options [I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] so that the mobile node | |||
may choose the one with the least cost. In addition, these IP | may choose the one with the least cost. In addition, these IP | |||
prefixes/addresses may be of different types regarding whether | prefixes/addresses may be of different types regarding whether | |||
mobility support is needed [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility]. A flow | mobility support is needed [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility]. A MN | |||
will need to choose the appropriate one according to whether it needs | will need to choose which IP prefix/address to use for each flow | |||
IP mobility support. | according to whether it needs IP mobility support or not. | |||
4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP prefix/ | 4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP prefix/ | |||
address | address | |||
When IP mobility support is not needed for a flow, the LM and FM | When IP mobility support is not needed for a flow, the LM and FM | |||
functions are not utilized so that the configurations in Section 3.1 | functions are not utilized so that the configurations in Section 3.1 | |||
are simplified as shown in Figure 3. | are simplified as shown in Figure 3. | |||
Net1 Net2 | Net1 Net2 | |||
skipping to change at page 9, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 27 ¶ | |||
.MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2) | | .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2) | | |||
.flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP2,...) | | .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP2,...) | | |||
+...............+ +---------------+ | +...............+ +---------------+ | |||
Figure 3: Changing to a new IP address/prefix | Figure 3: Changing to a new IP address/prefix | |||
When there is no need to provide IP mobility to a flow, the flow may | When there is no need to provide IP mobility to a flow, the flow may | |||
use a new IP address acquired from a new network as the MN moves to | use a new IP address acquired from a new network as the MN moves to | |||
the new network. | the new network. | |||
Regardless of whether IP mobility is needed, if the flow has | Regardless of whether IP mobility is needed, if the flow has not | |||
terminated before the MN moves to a new network, the flow may | terminated before the MN moves to a new network, the flow may | |||
subsequently restart using the new IP address assigned from the new | subsequently restart using the new IP address assigned from the new | |||
network. | network. | |||
When IP session continuity is needed, even if a flow is ongoing as | When IP session continuity is needed, even if a flow is ongoing as | |||
the MN moves, it may still be desirable for the flow to change to | the MN moves, it may still be desirable for the flow to change to | |||
using the new IP prefix configured in the new network. The flow may | using the new IP prefix configured in the new network. The flow may | |||
then close and then restart using a new IP address configured in the | then close and then restart using a new IP address configured in the | |||
new network. Such a change in the IP address of the flow may be | new network. Such a change in the IP address of the flow may be | |||
enabled using a higher layer mobility support which is not in the | enabled using a higher layer mobility support which is not in the | |||
scope of this document. | scope of this document. | |||
In Figure 3, a flow initiated while the MN was using the IP prefix | In Figure 3, a flow initiated while the MN was using the IP prefix | |||
IP1 anchored to a previous access router AR1 in network Net1 has | IP1 -- anchored to a previous access router AR1 in network Net1 -- | |||
terminated before the MN moves to a new network Net2. After moving | has terminated before the MN moves to a new network Net2. After | |||
to Net2, the MN uses the new IP prefix IP2 anchored to a new access | moving to Net2, the MN uses the new IP prefix IP2 -- anchored to a | |||
router AR2 in network Net2 to start a new flow. The packets may then | new access router AR2 in network Net2 -- to start a new flow. | |||
be forwarded without requiring IP layer mobility support. | Packets may then be forwarded without requiring IP layer mobility | |||
support. | ||||
An example call flow is outlined in Figure 4. MN attaches to a | An example call flow is outlined in Figure 4. A MN attaches to AR1, | |||
network and AR1 sends a router advertisement (RA) including | which sends a router advertisement (RA) including information about | |||
information about the prefix assigned to MN, from which MN configures | the prefix assigned to MN, from which MN configures an IP address | |||
the IP address to use (IP1). This address is used for new | (IP1). This address is used for new communications, for example with | |||
communications, for example with a correspondent node (CN). If the | a correspondent node (CN). If the MN moves to a new network and | |||
MN moves to a new network and attaches to AR2, the process is | attaches to AR2, the process is repeated (MN obtains a new IP | |||
repeated (MN obtains a new IP address, IP2, from AR2). Since the IP | address, IP2, from AR2). Since the IP address (IP1) configured at | |||
address (IP1) configured at the previously visited network is not | the previously visited network is not valid at the current attachment | |||
valid at the current attachment point, any existing flows have to be | point, and any existing flows have to be reestablished using IP2. | |||
reestablished using IP2. | ||||
MN AR1 AR2 CN | MN AR1 AR2 CN | |||
|MN attaches to AR1: | | | | |MN attaches to AR1: | | | | |||
|acquire MN-ID and profile | | | |acquires MN-ID and profile | | | |||
|--RS---------------->| | | | |--RS---------------->| | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|<----------RA(IP1)---| | | | |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
Assigned prefix IP1 | | | | Assigned prefix IP1 | | | | |||
IP1 address configuration | | | IP1 address configuration | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| | |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|MN detaches from AR1 | | | | |MN detaches from AR1 | | | | |||
skipping to change at page 10, line 47 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 47 ¶ | |||
When IP mobility is needed for a flow, the LM and FM functions in | When IP mobility is needed for a flow, the LM and FM functions in | |||
Section 3.1 are utilized. There are two possible cases: (i) the | Section 3.1 are utilized. There are two possible cases: (i) the | |||
initial anchor remains the anchor and forwards traffic to a new | initial anchor remains the anchor and forwards traffic to a new | |||
locator in the new network, and (ii) the mobility anchor (data plane | locator in the new network, and (ii) the mobility anchor (data plane | |||
function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ | function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ | |||
prefix. The latter enables optimized routes but requires some data | prefix. The latter enables optimized routes but requires some data | |||
plane node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. Next, we | plane node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. Next, we | |||
focus on the first case. The second one is addressed in Section 4.3. | focus on the first case. The second one is addressed in Section 4.3. | |||
Mobility support can be provided by using mobility management methods | Mobility support can be provided by using mobility management | |||
such as ([Paper-Distributed.Mobility], | methods, such as the several approaches surveyed in the academic | |||
papers ([Paper-Distributed.Mobility], | ||||
[Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] and | [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] and | |||
[Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review]). After moving, a certain MN's | [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review]). After moving, a certain MN's | |||
traffic flow may continue using the IP prefix from the prior network | traffic flow may continue using the IP prefix from the prior network | |||
of attachment. Yet some time later, the user application for the | of attachment. Yet, some time later, the application generating this | |||
flow may be closed. If the application is started again, the new | traffic flow may be closed. If the application is started again, the | |||
flow may not need to use the prior network's IP address to avoid | new flow may not need to use the prior network's IP address to avoid | |||
having to invoke IP mobility support. This may be the case where a | having to invoke IP mobility support. This may be the case where a | |||
dynamic IP prefix/address rather than a permanent one is used. The | dynamic IP prefix/address, rather than a permanent one, is used. | |||
flow may then use the new IP prefix in the network where the flow is | Packets belonging to this flow may then use the new IP prefix (the | |||
being initiated. Routing is again kept simpler without employing IP | one allocated in the network where the flow is being initiated). | |||
mobility and will remain so as long as the MN which is now in the new | Routing is again kept simpler without employing IP mobility and will | |||
network has not moved again and left to another new network. | remain so as long as the MN which is now in the new network does not | |||
move again to another network. | ||||
MN AR1 AR2 CN | MN AR1 AR2 CN | |||
|MN attaches to AR1: | | | | |MN attaches to AR1: | | | | |||
|acquire MN-ID and profile | | | |acquires MN-ID and profile | | | |||
|--RS---------------->| | | | |--RS---------------->| | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|<----------RA(IP1)---| | | | |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
Assigned prefix IP1 | | | | Assigned prefix IP1 | | | | |||
IP1 address configuration | | | IP1 address configuration | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| | |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|MN detach from AR1 | | | | |MN detaches from AR1 | | | | |||
|MN attach to AR2 | | | | |MN attaches to AR2 | | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|--RS------------------------------>| | | |--RS------------------------------>| | | |||
IP mobility support such as that described in next sub-section | (some IP mobility support solution) | |||
|<--------------RA(IP2,IP1)---------| | | |<--------------RA(IP2,IP1)---------| | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| +<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)---------------------->| | | +<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)---------------------->| | |||
| +<===========>+ | | | +<===========>+ | | |||
|<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-------------->+ | | |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-------------->+ | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
Assigned prefix IP2 | | | | Assigned prefix IP2 | | | | |||
IP2 address configuration | | | IP2 address configuration | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
Flow(IP1,IPcn) terminates | | | Flow(IP1,IPcn) terminates | | | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 17 ¶ | |||
to AR1 per default routing). The LM and FM functions are implemented | to AR1 per default routing). The LM and FM functions are implemented | |||
as shown in Figure 6. | as shown in Figure 6. | |||
Net1 Net2 | Net1 Net2 | |||
+---------------+ +---------------+ | +---------------+ +---------------+ | |||
|AR1 | |AR2 | | |AR1 | |AR2 | | |||
+---------------+ +---------------+ | +---------------+ +---------------+ | |||
|CPA: | |CPA: | | |CPA: | |CPA: | | |||
| | |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | | | | |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | | |||
|---------------| IP1 (anchored at Net1) |---------------| | |---------------| IP1 (anchored to Net1) |---------------| | |||
|DPA(IPa1): | is redirected to Net2 |DPA(IPa2): | | |DPA(IPa1): | is redirected to Net2 |DPA(IPa2): | | |||
|anchors IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2 | | |anchors IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2 | | |||
+---------------+ +---------------+ | +---------------+ +---------------+ | |||
+...............+ +---------------+ | +...............+ +---------------+ | |||
.MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | | .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | | |||
.flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | | .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | | |||
. . |flow(IP2,...) | | . . |flow(IP2,...) | | |||
+...............+ +---------------+ | +...............+ +---------------+ | |||
Figure 6: Anchor redirection | Figure 6: Anchor redirection | |||
Multiple instances of DPAs (at access routers), which are providing | Multiple instances of DPAs (at access routers), which are providing | |||
IP prefix to the MNs, are needed to provide distributed mobility | IP prefixes to the MNs, are needed to provide distributed mobility | |||
anchoring in an appropriate configuration such as those described in | anchoring in an appropriate configuration such as those described in | |||
Figure 1 (Section 3.1.1) for network-based distributed mobility or in | Figure 1 (Section 3.1.1) for network-based distributed mobility or in | |||
Figure 2 (Section 3.1.2) for client-based distributed mobility. | Figure 2 (Section 3.1.2) for client-based distributed mobility. | |||
4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation | 4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation | |||
We focus next on the case where the mobility anchor (data plane | We focus next on the case where the mobility anchor (data plane | |||
function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ | function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ | |||
prefix. This enables optimized routes but requires some data plane | prefix. This enables optimized routes but requires some data plane | |||
node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. | node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. | |||
IP mobility is invoked to enable IP session continuity for an ongoing | IP mobility is invoked to enable IP session continuity for an ongoing | |||
flow as the MN moves to a new network. Here the anchoring of the IP | flow as the MN moves to a new network. Here the anchoring of the IP | |||
address of the flow is in the home network of the flow, which is not | address of the flow is in the home network of the flow (i.e., | |||
in the current network of attachment. A centralized mobility | different from the current network of attachment). A centralized | |||
management mechanism may employ indirection from the anchor in the | mobility management mechanism may employ indirection from the anchor | |||
home network to the current network of attachment. Yet it may be | in the home network to the current network of attachment. Yet it may | |||
difficult to avoid unnecessarily long route when the route between | be difficult to avoid using an unnecessarily long route (when the | |||
the MN and the CN via the anchor in the home network is significantly | route between the MN and the CN via the anchor in the home network is | |||
longer than the direct route between them. An alternative is to | significantly longer than the direct route between them). An | |||
switch the IP prefix/address anchoring to the new network. | alternative is to move the IP prefix/address anchoring to the new | |||
network. | ||||
The IP prefix/address anchoring may move without changing the IP | The IP prefix/address anchoring may move without changing the IP | |||
prefix/address of the flow. Here the LM and FM functions in Figure 1 | prefix/address of the flow. Here the LM and FM functions in Figure 1 | |||
in Section 3.1 are implemented as shown in Figure 7. | in Section 3.1 are implemented as shown in Figure 7. | |||
Net1 Net2 | Net1 Net2 | |||
+---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
|AR1 | |AR2 | | ||||
+---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
|CPA: | |CPA: | | ||||
|LM:IP1 at IPa1 | |LM:IP1 at IPa2 | | +---------------+ +---------------+ | |||
| changes to | | | | |AR1 | |AR2 | | |||
| IP1 at IPa2 | | | | +---------------+ +---------------+ | |||
|---------------| |---------------| | |CPA: | |CPA: | | |||
|DPA(IPa1): | IP1 anchoring is effectively moved|DPA(IPa2): | | |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | |LM:IP1 at IPa2 | | |||
|anchored IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2,IP1| | | changes to | | | | |||
+---------------+ +---------------+ | | IP1 at IPa2 | | | | |||
|---------------| |---------------| | ||||
|DPA(IPa1): | IP1 anchoring effectively moved |DPA(IPa2): | | ||||
|anchored IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2,IP1| | ||||
+---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
+...............+ +---------------+ | +...............+ +---------------+ | |||
.MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | | .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | | |||
.flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | | .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | | |||
+...............+ +---------------+ | +...............+ +---------------+ | |||
Figure 7: Anchor mobility | Figure 7: Anchor mobility | |||
As an MN with an ongoing session moves to a new network, the flow may | As an MN with an ongoing session moves to a new network, the flow may | |||
preserve IP session continuity by moving the anchoring of the | preserve IP session continuity by moving the anchoring of the | |||
original IP prefix/address of the flow to the new network. | original IP prefix/address of the flow to the new network. | |||
One way to accomplish such a move is to use a centralized routing | One way to accomplish such a move is to use a centralized routing | |||
protocol, but such a solution presents some scalability concerns and | protocol, but such a solution may present some scalability concerns | |||
its applicability is typically limited to small networks. | and its applicability is typically limited to small networks. One | |||
example of this type of solution is described in | ||||
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp]. When a mobile associates with an anchor | ||||
the anchor injects the mobile's prefix into the global routing | ||||
system. If the mobile moves to a new anchor, the old anchor | ||||
withdraws the /64 and the new anchor injects it instead. | ||||
5. Security Considerations | 5. Security Considerations | |||
Security protocols and mechanisms are employed to secure the network | Security protocols and mechanisms are employed to secure the network | |||
and to make continuous security improvements, and a DMM solution is | and to make continuous security improvements, and a DMM solution is | |||
required to support them [RFC7333]. | required to support them [RFC7333]. | |||
In a DMM deployment [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] various attacks | In a DMM deployment [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] various attacks | |||
such as impersonation, denial of service, man-in-the-middle attacks | such as impersonation, denial of service, man-in-the-middle attacks | |||
need to be prevented. | need to be prevented. | |||
6. IANA Considerations | 6. IANA Considerations | |||
This document presents no IANA considerations. | This document presents no IANA considerations. | |||
7. Contributors | 7. Contributors | |||
Alexandre Petrescu and Fred L. Templin had contributed to earlier | Alexandre Petrescu and Fred Templin had contributed to earlier | |||
versions of this document regarding distributed anchoring for | versions of this document regarding distributed anchoring for | |||
hierarchical network and for network mobility, although these | hierarchical network and for network mobility, although these | |||
extensions were removed to keep the document within reasonable | extensions were removed to keep the document within reasonable | |||
length. | length. | |||
This document has benefited from other work on mobility support in | This document has benefited from other work on mobility support in | |||
SDN network, on providing mobility support only when needed, and on | SDN network, on providing mobility support only when needed, and on | |||
mobility support in enterprise network. These works have been | mobility support in enterprise network. These works have been | |||
referenced. While some of these authors have taken the work to | referenced. While some of these authors have taken the work to | |||
jointly write this document, others have contributed at least | jointly write this document, others have contributed at least | |||
indirectly by writing these drafts. The latter include Philippe | indirectly by writing these drafts. The latter include Philippe | |||
Bertin, Dapeng Liu, Satoru Matushima, Pierrick Seite, Jouni Korhonen, | Bertin, Dapeng Liu, Satoru Matushima, Pierrick Seite, Jouni Korhonen, | |||
and Sri Gundavelli. | and Sri Gundavelli. | |||
Valuable comments have been received from John Kaippallimalil, | Valuable comments have been received from John Kaippallimalil, | |||
ChunShan Xiong, and Dapeng Liu. Dirk von Hugo, Byju Pularikkal, | ChunShan Xiong, Dapeng Liu and Fred Templin. Dirk von Hugo, Byju | |||
Pierrick Seite have generously provided careful review with helpful | Pularikkal, Pierrick Seite have generously provided careful review | |||
corrections and suggestions. Marco Liebsch and Lyle Bertz also | with helpful corrections and suggestions. Marco Liebsch and Lyle | |||
performed very detailed and helpful reviews of this document. | Bertz also performed very detailed and helpful reviews of this | |||
document. | ||||
8. References | 8. References | |||
8.1. Normative References | 8.1. Normative References | |||
[I-D.bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif] | [RFC3753] Manner, J., Ed. and M. Kojo, Ed., "Mobility Related | |||
Bernardos, C., Oliva, A., Giust, F., Zuniga, J., and A. | Terminology", RFC 3753, DOI 10.17487/RFC3753, June 2004, | |||
Mourad, "Proxy Mobile IPv6 extensions for Distributed | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3753>. | |||
Mobility Management", draft-bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif-01 | ||||
(work in progress), March 2018. | [RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Ed., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., | |||
Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", | ||||
RFC 5213, DOI 10.17487/RFC5213, August 2008, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5213>. | ||||
[RFC6275] Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility | ||||
Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, DOI 10.17487/RFC6275, July | ||||
2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6275>. | ||||
[RFC7333] Chan, H., Ed., Liu, D., Seite, P., Yokota, H., and J. | ||||
Korhonen, "Requirements for Distributed Mobility | ||||
Management", RFC 7333, DOI 10.17487/RFC7333, August 2014, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7333>. | ||||
[RFC7429] Liu, D., Ed., Zuniga, JC., Ed., Seite, P., Chan, H., and | ||||
CJ. Bernardos, "Distributed Mobility Management: Current | ||||
Practices and Gap Analysis", RFC 7429, | ||||
DOI 10.17487/RFC7429, January 2015, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7429>. | ||||
8.2. Informative References | ||||
[I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] | [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] | |||
Gundavelli, S. and S. Jeon, "DMM Deployment Models and | Gundavelli, S. and S. Jeon, "DMM Deployment Models and | |||
Architectural Considerations", draft-ietf-dmm-deployment- | Architectural Considerations", draft-ietf-dmm-deployment- | |||
models-04 (work in progress), May 2018. | models-04 (work in progress), May 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp] | [I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp] | |||
Matsushima, S., Bertz, L., Liebsch, M., Gundavelli, S., | Matsushima, S., Bertz, L., Liebsch, M., Gundavelli, S., | |||
Moses, D., and C. Perkins, "Protocol for Forwarding Policy | Moses, D., and C. Perkins, "Protocol for Forwarding Policy | |||
Configuration (FPC) in DMM", draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-12 | Configuration (FPC) in DMM", draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-12 | |||
(work in progress), June 2018. | (work in progress), June 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility] | [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility] | |||
Yegin, A., Moses, D., Kweon, K., Lee, J., Park, J., and S. | Yegin, A., Moses, D., Kweon, K., Lee, J., Park, J., and S. | |||
Jeon, "On Demand Mobility Management", draft-ietf-dmm- | Jeon, "On Demand Mobility Management", draft-ietf-dmm- | |||
ondemand-mobility-15 (work in progress), July 2018. | ondemand-mobility-15 (work in progress), July 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif] | ||||
Bernardos, C., Oliva, A., Giust, F., Zuniga, J., and A. | ||||
Mourad, "Proxy Mobile IPv6 extensions for Distributed | ||||
Mobility Management", draft-ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif-03 (work | ||||
in progress), October 2018. | ||||
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp] | ||||
Templin, F., Saccone, G., Dawra, G., Lindem, A., and V. | ||||
Moreno, "A Simple BGP-based Mobile Routing System for the | ||||
Aeronautical Telecommunications Network", draft-ietf- | ||||
rtgwg-atn-bgp-01 (work in progress), January 2019. | ||||
[I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc] | [I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc] | |||
Matsushima, S. and R. Wakikawa, "Stateless user-plane | Matsushima, S. and R. Wakikawa, "Stateless user-plane | |||
architecture for virtualized EPC (vEPC)", draft- | architecture for virtualized EPC (vEPC)", draft- | |||
matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc-06 (work in progress), | matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc-06 (work in progress), | |||
March 2016. | March 2016. | |||
[I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] | [I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] | |||
McCann, P. and J. Kaippallimalil, "Communicating Prefix | McCann, P. and J. Kaippallimalil, "Communicating Prefix | |||
Cost to Mobile Nodes", draft-mccann-dmm-prefixcost-03 | Cost to Mobile Nodes", draft-mccann-dmm-prefixcost-03 | |||
(work in progress), April 2016. | (work in progress), April 2016. | |||
skipping to change at page 15, line 36 ¶ | skipping to change at page 16, line 25 ¶ | |||
[I-D.seite-dmm-dma] | [I-D.seite-dmm-dma] | |||
Seite, P., Bertin, P., and J. Lee, "Distributed Mobility | Seite, P., Bertin, P., and J. Lee, "Distributed Mobility | |||
Anchoring", draft-seite-dmm-dma-07 (work in progress), | Anchoring", draft-seite-dmm-dma-07 (work in progress), | |||
February 2014. | February 2014. | |||
[I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring] | [I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring] | |||
Kim, Y. and S. Jeon, "Enhanced Mobility Anchoring in | Kim, Y. and S. Jeon, "Enhanced Mobility Anchoring in | |||
Distributed Mobility Management", draft-yhkim-dmm- | Distributed Mobility Management", draft-yhkim-dmm- | |||
enhanced-anchoring-05 (work in progress), July 2016. | enhanced-anchoring-05 (work in progress), July 2016. | |||
[RFC3753] Manner, J., Ed. and M. Kojo, Ed., "Mobility Related | ||||
Terminology", RFC 3753, DOI 10.17487/RFC3753, June 2004, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3753>. | ||||
[RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Ed., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., | ||||
Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", | ||||
RFC 5213, DOI 10.17487/RFC5213, August 2008, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5213>. | ||||
[RFC6275] Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility | ||||
Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, DOI 10.17487/RFC6275, July | ||||
2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6275>. | ||||
[RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Ed., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, | ||||
T., Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation | ||||
Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)", | ||||
RFC 6459, DOI 10.17487/RFC6459, January 2012, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6459>. | ||||
[RFC7333] Chan, H., Ed., Liu, D., Seite, P., Yokota, H., and J. | ||||
Korhonen, "Requirements for Distributed Mobility | ||||
Management", RFC 7333, DOI 10.17487/RFC7333, August 2014, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7333>. | ||||
[RFC7429] Liu, D., Ed., Zuniga, JC., Ed., Seite, P., Chan, H., and | ||||
CJ. Bernardos, "Distributed Mobility Management: Current | ||||
Practices and Gap Analysis", RFC 7429, | ||||
DOI 10.17487/RFC7429, January 2015, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7429>. | ||||
8.2. Informative References | ||||
[Paper-Distributed.Mobility] | [Paper-Distributed.Mobility] | |||
Lee, J., Bonnin, J., Seite, P., and H. Chan, "Distributed | Lee, J., Bonnin, J., Seite, P., and H. Chan, "Distributed | |||
IP Mobility Management from the Perspective of the IETF: | IP Mobility Management from the Perspective of the IETF: | |||
Motivations, Requirements, Approaches, Comparison, and | Motivations, Requirements, Approaches, Comparison, and | |||
Challenges", IEEE Wireless Communications, October 2013. | Challenges", IEEE Wireless Communications, October 2013. | |||
[Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] | [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] | |||
Chan, H., "Proxy Mobile IP with Distributed Mobility | Chan, H., "Proxy Mobile IP with Distributed Mobility | |||
Anchors", Proceedings of GlobeCom Workshop on Seamless | Anchors", Proceedings of GlobeCom Workshop on Seamless | |||
Wireless Mobility, December 2010. | Wireless Mobility, December 2010. | |||
[Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review] | [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review] | |||
Chan, H., Yokota, H., Xie, J., Seite, P., and D. Liu, | Chan, H., Yokota, H., Xie, J., Seite, P., and D. Liu, | |||
"Distributed and Dynamic Mobility Management in Mobile | "Distributed and Dynamic Mobility Management in Mobile | |||
Internet: Current Approaches and Issues", February 2011. | Internet: Current Approaches and Issues", February 2011. | |||
Authors' Addresses | [RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Ed., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, | |||
T., Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation | ||||
Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)", | ||||
RFC 6459, DOI 10.17487/RFC6459, January 2012, | ||||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6459>. | ||||
Authors' Addresses | ||||
H. Anthony Chan (editor) | H. Anthony Chan (editor) | |||
Huawei Technologies | Huawei Technologies | |||
5340 Legacy Dr. Building 3 | 5340 Legacy Dr. Building 3 | |||
Plano, TX 75024 | Plano, TX 75024 | |||
USA | USA | |||
Email: h.a.chan@ieee.org | Email: h.a.chan@ieee.org | |||
Xinpeng Wei | Xinpeng Wei | |||
Huawei Technologies | Huawei Technologies | |||
Xin-Xi Rd. No. 3, Haidian District | Xin-Xi Rd. No. 3, Haidian District | |||
Beijing, 100095 | Beijing, 100095 | |||
P. R. China | P. R. China | |||
Email: weixinpeng@huawei.com | Email: weixinpeng@huawei.com | |||
Jong-Hyouk Lee | Jong-Hyouk Lee | |||
Sangmyung University | Sangmyung University | |||
End of changes. 48 change blocks. | ||||
162 lines changed or deleted | 172 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |