draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-04.txt   draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-05.txt 
NETLMM Working Group V. Devarapalli (ed.) NETLMM Working Group V. Devarapalli (ed.)
Internet-Draft WiChorus Internet-Draft WiChorus
Intended status: Standards Track R. Koodli (ed.) Intended status: Standards Track R. Koodli (ed.)
Expires: August 20, 2009 Starent Networks Expires: September 5, 2009 Starent Networks
H. Lim H. Lim
N. Kant N. Kant
Stoke Stoke
S. Krishnan S. Krishnan
Ericsson Ericsson
J. Laganier J. Laganier
DOCOMO Euro-Labs DOCOMO Euro-Labs
February 16, 2009 March 4, 2009
Heartbeat Mechanism for Proxy Mobile IPv6 Heartbeat Mechanism for Proxy Mobile IPv6
draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-04.txt draft-ietf-netlmm-pmipv6-heartbeat-05.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified,
and derivative works of it may not be created, except to format it
for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 20, 2009. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 5, 2009.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
publication of this document. Please review these documents Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect and restrictions with respect to this document.
to this document.
Abstract Abstract
Proxy Mobile IPv6 is a network-based mobility management protocol. Proxy Mobile IPv6 is a network-based mobility management protocol.
The mobility entities involved in the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol, the The mobility entities involved in the Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol, the
Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) and the Local Mobility Anchor (LMA), Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) and the Local Mobility Anchor (LMA),
setup tunnels dynamically to manage mobility for a mobile node within setup tunnels dynamically to manage mobility for a mobile node within
the Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. This document describes a heartbeat the Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain. This document describes a heartbeat
mechanism between the MAG and the LMA to detect failures quickly and mechanism between the MAG and the LMA to detect failures quickly and
take appropriate action. take appropriate action.
skipping to change at page 3, line 20 skipping to change at page 3, line 20
network-based mobility, the PMIPv6 protocol defines a Mobile Access network-based mobility, the PMIPv6 protocol defines a Mobile Access
Gateway (MAG), which acts as a proxy for the Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] Gateway (MAG), which acts as a proxy for the Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775]
signaling, and the Local Mobility Anchor (LMA) which acts similar to signaling, and the Local Mobility Anchor (LMA) which acts similar to
a Home Agent, anchoring a Mobile Node's sessions within a Proxy a Home Agent, anchoring a Mobile Node's sessions within a Proxy
Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) domain. The LMA and the MAG establish a Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) domain. The LMA and the MAG establish a
bidirectional tunnel for forwarding all data traffic belonging to the bidirectional tunnel for forwarding all data traffic belonging to the
Mobile Nodes. Mobile Nodes.
In a distributed environment such as a PMIPv6 domain consisting of In a distributed environment such as a PMIPv6 domain consisting of
LMA and MAGs, it is necessary for the nodes to 1) have a consistent LMA and MAGs, it is necessary for the nodes to 1) have a consistent
state about each others reachability, and 2) quickly inform peers in state about each other's reachability, and 2) quickly inform peers in
the event of recovery from node failures. So, when the LMA restarts the event of recovery from node failures. So, when the LMA restarts
after a failure, the MAG should (quickly) learn about the restart so after a failure, the MAG should (quickly) learn about the restart so
that it could take appropriate actions (such as releasing any that it could take appropriate actions (such as releasing any
resources). When there are no failures, a MAG should know about resources). When there are no failures, a MAG should know about
LMA's reachability (and vice versa) so that the path can be assumed LMA's reachability (and vice versa) so that the path can be assumed
to be functioning. to be functioning.
This document specifies a heartbeat mechanism between the MAG and the This document specifies a heartbeat mechanism between the MAG and the
LMA to detect the status of reachability between them. This document LMA to detect the status of reachability between them. This document
also specifies a mechanism to indicate node restarts; the mechanism also specifies a mechanism to indicate node restarts; the mechanism
skipping to change at page 4, line 25 skipping to change at page 4, line 25
message SHOULD NOT be sent. Similarly, the LMA SHOULD NOT send a message SHOULD NOT be sent. Similarly, the LMA SHOULD NOT send a
Heartbeat Request message to a MAG if there is no active binding Heartbeat Request message to a MAG if there is no active binding
cache entry created by the MAG. A PMIPv6 node SHOULD always respond cache entry created by the MAG. A PMIPv6 node SHOULD always respond
to a Heartbeat Request message with a Heartbeat Response message, to a Heartbeat Request message with a Heartbeat Response message,
irrespective of whether there is an active binding cache entry. irrespective of whether there is an active binding cache entry.
The HEARTBEAT_INTERVAL SHOULD NOT be configured to a value less than The HEARTBEAT_INTERVAL SHOULD NOT be configured to a value less than
30 seconds. Sending heartbeat messages too often may become an 30 seconds. Sending heartbeat messages too often may become an
overhead on the path between the MAG and the LMA. The overhead on the path between the MAG and the LMA. The
HEARTBEAT_INTERVAL can be set to a much larger value on the LMA, if HEARTBEAT_INTERVAL can be set to a much larger value on the LMA, if
required, to reduce of burden of sending periodic heartbeat messages. required, to reduce the burden of sending periodic heartbeat
messages.
If the LMA or the MAG do not support the heartbeat messages, they If the LMA or the MAG do not support the heartbeat messages, they
respond with a Binding Error message with status set to '2' respond with a Binding Error message with status set to '2'
(unrecognized MH type value) as described in [RFC3775]. When the (unrecognized MH type value) as described in [RFC3775]. When the
Binding Error message with status set to '2' is received in response Binding Error message with status set to '2' is received in response
to Heartbeat Request message, the initiating MAG or the LMA MUST NOT to Heartbeat Request message, the initiating MAG or the LMA MUST NOT
use heartbeat messages with the other end again. use heartbeat messages with the other end again.
If a PMIPv6 node has detected that a peer PMIPv6 node has failed or If a PMIPv6 node has detected that a peer PMIPv6 node has failed or
restarted without retaining the PMIPv6 session state, it should mark restarted without retaining the PMIPv6 session state, it should mark
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 6, line 5
3.3. Heartbeat Message 3.3. Heartbeat Message
The Heartbeat Message is based on the Mobility Header defined in The Heartbeat Message is based on the Mobility Header defined in
Section 6.1 of [RFC3775]. The 'MH type' field in the Mobility Header Section 6.1 of [RFC3775]. The 'MH type' field in the Mobility Header
indicates that it is a Heartbeat Message. This document does not indicates that it is a Heartbeat Message. This document does not
make any other changes to the Mobility Header message. Please refer make any other changes to the Mobility Header message. Please refer
to [RFC3775] for a description of the fields in the Mobility Header to [RFC3775] for a description of the fields in the Mobility Header
Message. Message.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Payload Proto | Header Len | MH Type | Reserved | | Payload Proto | Header Len | MH Type | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Checksum | | | Checksum | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| | | |
. . . .
. Message Data . . Message Data .
. . . .
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Mobility Header Message Format
The Heartbeat Message follows the 'Checksum' field in the above The Heartbeat Message follows the 'Checksum' field in the above
message. The following illustrates the message format for the message. The following illustrates the message format for the
Heartbeat Mobility Header message. Heartbeat Mobility Header message.
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved |U|R| | Reserved |U|R|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sequence Number | | Sequence Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
. . . .
. Mobility options . . Mobility options .
. . . .
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Heartbeat Message Format
Reserved Reserved
Set to 0 and ignored by the receiver. Set to 0 and ignored by the receiver.
'U' 'U'
Set to 1 in Unsolicited Heartbeat Response. Otherwise set to 0. Set to 1 in Unsolicited Heartbeat Response. Otherwise set to 0.
'R' 'R'
skipping to change at page 7, line 35 skipping to change at page 7, line 42
message. It has an alignment requirement of 4n+2. message. It has an alignment requirement of 4n+2.
0 1 2 3 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 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 | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Restart Counter | | Restart Counter |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: Restart Counter Mobility Option
Type Type
A 8-bit field that indicates that it is a Restart Counter mobility A 8-bit field that indicates that it is a Restart Counter mobility
option. option.
Length Length
A 8-bit field that indicates the length of the option in octets A 8-bit field that indicates the length of the option in octets
excluding the 'Type' and 'Length' fields. It is set to '4'. excluding the 'Type' and 'Length' fields. It is set to '4'.
skipping to change at page 8, line 43 skipping to change at page 9, line 6
concluding that the peer PMIPv6 node is not reachable. The concluding that the peer PMIPv6 node is not reachable. The
default value for this variable is 3. default value for this variable is 3.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
The heartbeat messages are just used for checking reachability The heartbeat messages are just used for checking reachability
between the MAG and the LMA. They do not carry information that is between the MAG and the LMA. They do not carry information that is
useful for eavesdroppers on the path. Therefore, confidentiality useful for eavesdroppers on the path. Therefore, confidentiality
protection is not required. Integrity protection using IPsec protection is not required. Integrity protection using IPsec
[RFC4301] for the heartbeat messages MUST be supported on the MAG and [RFC4301] for the heartbeat messages MUST be supported on the MAG and
the LMA. RFC 4887 [RFC4887] describes how to protect Mobile IPv6 the LMA. RFC 4877 [RFC4877] describes how to protect Mobile IPv6
Binding Update and Acknowledgment signaling with IPsec. The Binding Update and Acknowledgment signaling with IPsec. The
Heartbeat message defined in this specification is merely another Heartbeat message defined in this specification is merely another
subtype of the same Mobility Header protocol that is already being subtype of the same Mobility Header protocol that is already being
protected by IPsec. Therefore, protecting this additional message is protected by IPsec. Therefore, protecting this additional message is
possible using the mechanisms and security policy models from these possible using the mechanisms and security policy models from these
RFCs. The security policy database entries should use the new MH RFCs. The security policy database entries should use the new MH
Type, the Heartbeat Message, for the MH Type selector. See RFC 4887 Type, the Heartbeat Message, for the MH Type selector. See RFC 4877
for more details. for more details.
If dynamic key negotiation between the MAG and the LMA is required, If dynamic key negotiation between the MAG and the LMA is required,
IKEv2 [RFC4306] should be used. IKEv2 [RFC4306] should be used.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
The Heartbeat message defined in Section 3.3 must have the type value The Heartbeat message defined in Section 3.3 must have the type value
allocated from the same space as the 'MH Type' name space in the allocated from the same space as the 'MH Type' name space in the
Mobility Header defined in RFC 3775 [RFC3775]. Mobility Header defined in RFC 3775 [RFC3775].
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at page 10, line 17
Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
Mobile IPv6", draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support-08 Mobile IPv6", draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support-08
(work in progress), January 2009. (work in progress), January 2009.
[RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the [RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005. Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005.
[RFC4306] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", [RFC4306] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol",
RFC 4306, December 2005. RFC 4306, December 2005.
[RFC4887] Thubert, P., Wakikawa, R., and V. Devarapalli, "Network [RFC4877] Devarapalli, V. and F. Dupont, "Mobile IPv6 Operation with
Mobility Home Network Models", RFC 4887, July 2007. IKEv2 and the Revised IPsec Architecture", RFC 4877,
April 2007.
[RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support [RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004. in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.giaretta-netlmm-dt-protocol] [I-D.giaretta-netlmm-dt-protocol]
Giaretta, G., "The NetLMM Protocol", Giaretta, G., "The NetLMM Protocol",
draft-giaretta-netlmm-dt-protocol-02 (work in progress), draft-giaretta-netlmm-dt-protocol-02 (work in progress),
October 2006. October 2006.
 End of changes. 15 change blocks. 
16 lines changed or deleted 28 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/