| rfc8818xml2.original.xml | rfc8818.xml | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> | ||||
| <!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629-xhtml.ent"> | ||||
| <rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" number="8818" consensus="true" | ||||
| category="info" | ||||
| docName="draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-15" | ||||
| ipr="trust200902" obsoletes="" updates="" submissionType="IETF" | ||||
| xml:lang="en" tocInclude="true" symRefs="true" sortRefs="true" | ||||
| version="3"> | ||||
| <front> | ||||
| <title abbrev="Distributed Mobility Anchoring">Distributed Mobility Anchorin | ||||
| g</title> | ||||
| <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8818"/> | ||||
| <author fullname="H. Anthony Chan" initials="H" surname="Chan" role="editor" | ||||
| > | ||||
| <organization abbrev="CIHE">Caritas Institute of Higher Education</organiz | ||||
| ation> | ||||
| <address> | ||||
| <postal> | ||||
| <street>2 Chui Ling Lane, Tseung Kwan O | ||||
| </street> | ||||
| <city>N.T.</city> | ||||
| <country>Hong Kong</country> | ||||
| </postal> | ||||
| <email>h.a.chan@ieee.org</email> | ||||
| </address> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author fullname="Xinpeng Wei" initials="X" surname="Wei"> | ||||
| <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization> | ||||
| <address> | ||||
| <postal> | ||||
| <street>Xin-Xi Rd. No. 3, Haidian District</street> | ||||
| <city>Beijing, 100095</city> | ||||
| <country>China</country> | ||||
| </postal> | ||||
| <email>weixinpeng@huawei.com</email> | ||||
| </address> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author fullname="Jong-Hyouk Lee" initials="J" surname="Lee"> | ||||
| <organization>Sejong University</organization> | ||||
| <address> | ||||
| <postal> | ||||
| <street>209, Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu</street> | ||||
| <city>Seoul</city> | ||||
| <code>05006 | ||||
| </code> | ||||
| <country>Republic of Korea</country> | ||||
| </postal> | ||||
| <email>jonghyouk@sejong.ac.kr</email> | ||||
| </address> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author fullname="Seil Jeon" initials="S" surname="Jeon"> | ||||
| <organization>Sungkyunkwan University</organization> | ||||
| <address> | ||||
| <postal> | ||||
| <street>2066 Seobu-ro, Jangan-gu</street> | ||||
| <city>Suwon, Gyeonggi-do</city> | ||||
| <country>Republic of Korea</country> | ||||
| </postal> | ||||
| <email>seiljeon.ietf@gmaiil.com</email> | ||||
| </address> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author fullname="Carlos J. Bernardos" initials="CJ." surname="Bernardos" ro | ||||
| le="editor"> | ||||
| <organization abbrev="UC3M"> | ||||
| Universidad Carlos III de Madrid | ||||
| </organization> | ||||
| <address> | ||||
| <postal> | ||||
| <street>Av. Universidad, 30</street> | ||||
| <city>Leganes, Madrid</city> | ||||
| <code>28911</code> | ||||
| <country>Spain</country> | ||||
| </postal> | ||||
| <phone>+34 91624 6236</phone> | ||||
| <email>cjbc@it.uc3m.es</email> | ||||
| <uri>http://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/</uri> | ||||
| </address> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <date year="2020" month="August"/> | ||||
| <area/> | ||||
| <workgroup>DMM</workgroup> | ||||
| <keyword>anchor</keyword> | ||||
| <keyword>address continuity</keyword> | ||||
| <keyword>reachability</keyword> | ||||
| <keyword>continuity</keyword> | ||||
| <keyword>PMIPv6</keyword> | ||||
| <keyword>MIPv6</keyword> | ||||
| <!-- [rfced] This questions is for author H. Anthony Chan. Would it be | ||||
| appropriate to shorten your affiliation "Caritas Institute of Higher | ||||
| Education" to "Caritas Institute" in the document header? The shortened | ||||
| form fits a bit better in the txt and pdf outputs. The full form would | ||||
| appear in the Authors' Addresses section. We are also okay with leaving | ||||
| the long form in the document header. Please let us know your preference. | ||||
| --> | ||||
| <abstract> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| This document defines distributed mobility anchoring in terms of the different | ||||
| configurations and functions to provide IP mobility support. A network may be | ||||
| configured with distributed mobility anchoring functions for both network-based | ||||
| or host-based mobility support, depending on the network's needs. In a | ||||
| distributed mobility anchoring environment, multiple anchors are available for | ||||
| mid-session switching of an IP prefix anchor. To start a new flow or to handle a | ||||
| flow not requiring IP session continuity as a mobile node moves to a new | ||||
| network, the flow can be started or restarted using an IP address configured | ||||
| from the new IP prefix anchored to the new network. If the flow needs to survive | ||||
| the change of network, there are solutions that can be used to enable IP address | ||||
| mobility. This document describes different anchoring approaches, depending on | ||||
| the IP mobility needs, and how this IP address mobility is handled by the | ||||
| network. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </abstract> | ||||
| </front> | ||||
| <middle> | ||||
| <section anchor="intro" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Introduction</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| A key requirement in distributed mobility management (DMM) <xref target="RFC7333 | ||||
| " format="default"/> is | ||||
| to enable traffic to avoid traversing a single mobility anchor far from an | ||||
| optimal route. This document defines different configurations, functional | ||||
| operations, and parameters for distributed mobility anchoring and explains how t | ||||
| o | ||||
| use them to avoid unnecessarily long routes when a mobile node moves. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Other distributed mobility management documents already address | ||||
| source address selection <xref target="RFC8653" format="default"/> and | ||||
| control-plane and data-plane signaling <xref target="I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp" form | ||||
| at="default"/>. A | ||||
| number of distributed mobility solutions have also been proposed, for example, | ||||
| in <xref target="I-D.seite-dmm-dma" format="default"/>, <xref target="I-D.ietf-d | ||||
| mm-pmipv6-dlif" format="default"/>, <xref target="I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi" for | ||||
| mat="default"/>, <xref target="I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring" format="default | ||||
| "/>, and <xref target="I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc" format="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Distributed mobility anchoring employs multiple anchors in the data plane. In | ||||
| general, control-plane functions may be separated from data-plane functions and | ||||
| be centralized but may also be co-located with the data-plane functions at the | ||||
| distributed anchors. Different configurations of distributed mobility anchoring | ||||
| are described in <xref target="sec_distributed-anchoring-configurations" format= | ||||
| "default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| As a Mobile Node (MN) attaches to an access router and establishes a link | ||||
| between them, a /64 IPv6 prefix anchored to the router may be assigned to the | ||||
| link for exclusive use by the MN <xref target="RFC6459" format="default"/>. The | ||||
| MN 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 Correspondent Node (CN). When there | ||||
| are multiple mobility anchors assigned to the same MN, an address selection for | ||||
| a given flow is first required before the flow is initiated. Using an anchor in | ||||
| an MN's network of attachment has the advantage that the packets can simply be | ||||
| forwarded according to the forwarding table. However, after the flow has been | ||||
| initiated, the MN may later move to another network that assigns a new mobility | ||||
| anchor to the MN. Since the new anchor is located in a different network, the | ||||
| MN's assigned prefix does not belong to the network where the MN is currently | ||||
| attached. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| When the MN wants to continue using its assigned prefix to complete ongoing data | ||||
| sessions after it has moved to a new network, the network needs to provide | ||||
| support for the MN's IP address and session continuity, since routing packets | ||||
| to the MN through the new network deviates from applying default routes. The IP | ||||
| session continuity needs of a flow (application) determine how the IP address | ||||
| used by this flow has to be anchored. If the ongoing IP flow can cope with an IP | ||||
| prefix/address change, the flow can be reinitiated with a new IP address | ||||
| anchored in the new network. On the other hand, if the ongoing IP flow cannot | ||||
| cope with such change, mobility support is needed. A network supporting a mix of | ||||
| flows both requiring and not requiring IP mobility support will need to | ||||
| distinguish these flows. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_definitions" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Conventions and Terminology</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", | ||||
| "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL | ||||
| NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", | ||||
| "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", | ||||
| "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are | ||||
| to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> | ||||
| <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, | ||||
| as shown here. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| All general mobility-related terms and their acronyms used in this document | ||||
| are to be interpreted as defined in the Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) base specification | ||||
| <xref target="RFC6275" format="default"/>, the Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) | ||||
| specification <xref target="RFC5213" format="default"/>, the Mobility | ||||
| Terminology document <xref target="RFC3753" format="default"/>, and the DMM | ||||
| Current Practices and Gap Analysis document <xref target="RFC7429" format="defau | ||||
| lt"/>. | ||||
| These include terms such as Mobile Node (MN), Correspondent Node (CN), Home | ||||
| Agent (HA), Home Address (HoA), Care-of-Address (CoA), Local Mobility Anchor | ||||
| (LMA), and Mobile Access Gateway (MAG). | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t>In addition, this document uses the following terms and definitions:</t | ||||
| > | ||||
| <dl newline="false" spacing="normal"> | ||||
| <dt>IP session continuity:</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The ability to maintain an ongoing transport interaction by keeping the same | ||||
| local endpoint IP address throughout the lifetime of the IP socket despite the | ||||
| mobile host changing its point of attachment within the IP network topology. The | ||||
| IP address of the host may change after closing the IP socket and before opening | ||||
| a new one, but that does not jeopardize the ability of applications using these | ||||
| IP sockets to work flawlessly. Session continuity is essential for mobile hosts | ||||
| to maintain ongoing flows without any interruption <xref target="RFC8653" format | ||||
| ="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Higher-layer session continuity:</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The ability to maintain an ongoing transport- or higher-layer (e.g., application | ||||
| ) | ||||
| interaction by keeping the session identifiers throughout the lifetime of the | ||||
| session despite the mobile host changing its point of attachment within the IP | ||||
| network topology. This can be achieved by using mechanisms at the transport or | ||||
| higher layers. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>IP address reachability:</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The ability to maintain the same IP address for an extended period of time. The | ||||
| IP address stays the same across independent sessions, even in the absence of | ||||
| any session. The IP address may be published in a long-term registry (e.g., DNS) | ||||
| and is made available for serving incoming (e.g., TCP) connections. IP address | ||||
| reachability is essential for mobile hosts to use specific/published IP | ||||
| addresses <xref target="RFC8653" format="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>IP mobility:</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The combination of IP address reachability and session continuity. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Anchoring (of an IP prefix/address):</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| An IP prefix (i.e., Home Network Prefix (HNP)) or address (i.e., HoA) assigned | ||||
| for use by an MN is topologically anchored to an anchor node when the anchor | ||||
| node is able to advertise a route into the routing infrastructure for the | ||||
| assigned IP prefix. The traffic using the assigned IP address/prefix must | ||||
| traverse the anchor node. We can refer to the function performed by the IP ancho | ||||
| r | ||||
| node as anchoring, which is a data-plane function. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Location Management (LM) function:</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| A control-plane function that keeps and manages the network location information | ||||
| of an MN. The location information may be a binding of the advertised IP | ||||
| 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. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| When the MN is a Mobile Router (MR), the location information will also include | ||||
| the Mobile Network Prefix (MNP), which is the aggregate IP prefix delegated to | ||||
| the MR to assign IP prefixes for use by the Mobile Network Nodes (MNNs) in the | ||||
| mobile network. </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| In a client-server protocol model, secure (i.e., authenticated and authorized) l | ||||
| ocation query and update messages may be | ||||
| exchanged between a Location Management client (LMc) and a Location Management | ||||
| server (LMs), where the location information can be updated or queried from | ||||
| the LMc. | ||||
| Optionally, there may be a Location Management proxy (LMp) between LMc and LMs. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| With separation of control plane and data plane, the LM function is in the | ||||
| control plane. It may be a logical function at the control-plane node, control-p | ||||
| lane anchor, or mobility controller. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| It may be distributed or centralized. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Forwarding Management (FM) function:</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Packet interception and forwarding to/from the IP address/prefix | ||||
| assigned for use by the MN, based on the internetwork location information, | ||||
| either to the destination or to some other network element | ||||
| that knows how to forward the packets to their destination. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| This function may be used to achieve traffic indirection. | ||||
| With separation of control plane and data plane, | ||||
| the FM function may split into an FM function in the data plane (FM-DP) | ||||
| and an FM function in the control plane (FM-CP). | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| FM-DP may be distributed with distributed mobility management. | ||||
| It may be a function in a data-plane anchor or data-plane node. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| FM-CP may be distributed or centralized. | ||||
| It may be a function in a control-plane node, | ||||
| control-plane anchor, or mobility controller. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Home Control-Plane Anchor (Home-CPA or H-CPA):</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The Home-CPA function hosts the MN's mobility | ||||
| session. There can be more than one mobility session for a mobile | ||||
| node, and those sessions may be anchored on the same or different | ||||
| Home-CPA's. The Home-CPA will interface with the Home-DPA for | ||||
| managing the forwarding state. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Home Data-Plane Anchor (Home-DPA or H-DPA):</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The Home-DPA is the topological anchor for the MN's IP address/prefix(es). | ||||
| The Home-DPA is chosen by the Home-CPA on a session basis. The Home-DPA is | ||||
| in the forwarding path for all the mobile node's IP traffic. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Access Control-Plane Node (Access-CPN or A-CPN):</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The Access-CPN is responsible for interfacing with the mobile | ||||
| node's Home-CPA and with the Access-DPN. The Access-CPN has a | ||||
| protocol interface to the Home-CPA. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| <dt>Access Data-Plane Node (Access-DPN or A-DPN):</dt> | ||||
| <dd> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The Access-DPN function is hosted on the first-hop router where | ||||
| the mobile node is attached. This function is not hosted on a | ||||
| Layer 2 bridging device such as an eNode(B) or Access Point. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </dd> | ||||
| </dl> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_distributed-anchoring" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Distributed Mobility Anchoring</name> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_distributed-anchoring-configurations" numbered="true" toc=" | ||||
| default"> | ||||
| <name>Configurations for Different Networks</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| We next describe some configurations with multiple distributed anchors. To | ||||
| cover the widest possible spectrum of scenarios, we consider architectures in | ||||
| which the control and data planes are separated. We analyze where LM and FM | ||||
| functions, which are specific sub-functions involved in mobility management, | ||||
| can be placed when looking at the different scenarios with distributed | ||||
| anchors. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_distributed-anchoring-network-based" numbered="true" toc="d | ||||
| efault"> | ||||
| <name>Network-Based DMM</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| <xref target="fig_dmm_net-based" format="default"/> shows a general scenario for | ||||
| network-based | ||||
| distributed mobility management. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The main characteristics of a network-based DMM solution are: | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <ul spacing="normal"> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| There are multiple data-plane anchors, each with an FM-DP function. | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| The control plane may either be distributed (not shown in the figure) or | ||||
| centralized (as shown in the figure). | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| The Control-Plane Anchor (CPA) and the Data Plane Anchor (DPA) may or may not | ||||
| be co-located. If the CPA is co-located with the distributed DPAs, then | ||||
| there are multiple co-located CPA-DPA instances (not shown in the figure). | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| An IP prefix/address IP1 (anchored to the DPA with IP address IPa1) is assigned | ||||
| for use to an MN. The MN uses this IP1 address to communicate with CNs (not | ||||
| shown in the figure). | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| The location management (LM) function may be co-located or split (as shown in | ||||
| the figure) into a separate server (LMs) and a client (LMc). In this case, the | ||||
| LMs may be centralized whereas the LMc may be distributed or centralized. | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| </ul> | ||||
| <figure anchor="fig_dmm_net-based"> | ||||
| <name>Network-Based DMM Configuration</name> | ||||
| <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
| ____________ Network | ||||
| ___/ \___________ | ||||
| / +-----+ \___ | ||||
| ( |LMs | Control- \ | ||||
| / +-.---+ plane \ | ||||
| / +--------.---+ functions \ | ||||
| ( |CPA: . | in the ) | ||||
| ( |FM-CP, LMc | network ) | ||||
| ( +------------+ \ | ||||
| / . . \ | ||||
| ( . . ) | ||||
| ( . . ) | ||||
| ( . . \ | ||||
| \ +------------+ +------------+Distributed ) | ||||
| ( |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): |DPAs ) | ||||
| ( |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | _/ | ||||
| \ |FM-DP | |FM-DP | etc. / | ||||
| \ +------------+ +------------+ / | ||||
| \___ Data-plane _____/ | ||||
| \______ functions / | ||||
| \__________________/ | ||||
| +------------+ | ||||
| |MN(IP1) | Mobile node attached | ||||
| |flow(IP1,..)| to the network | ||||
| +------------+ | ||||
| ]]></artwork> | ||||
| </figure> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_distributed-anchoring-host-based" numbered="true" toc="defa | ||||
| ult"> | ||||
| <name>Client-Based DMM</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| <xref target="fig_dmm_client-based" format="default"/> shows a general scenario | ||||
| for client-based | ||||
| distributed mobility management. In this configuration, the mobile node performs | ||||
| Control-Plane Node (CPN) and Data-Plane Node (DPN) mobility functions, namely | ||||
| the forwarding management and location management (client) roles. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <figure anchor="fig_dmm_client-based"> | ||||
| <name>Client-Based DMM Configuration</name> | ||||
| <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
| +-----+ | ||||
| |LMs | | ||||
| +-.---+ | ||||
| +--------.---+ | ||||
| |CPA: . | | ||||
| |FM-CP, LMp | | ||||
| +------------+ | ||||
| . . | ||||
| . . | ||||
| . . | ||||
| . . | ||||
| +------------+ +------------+ Distributed | ||||
| |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): | DPAs | ||||
| |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | | ||||
| |FM-DP | |FM-DP | etc. | ||||
| +------------+ +------------+ | ||||
| +------------+ | ||||
| |MN(IP1) |Mobile node | ||||
| |flow(IP1,..)|using IP1 | ||||
| |FM, LMc |anchored to | ||||
| +------------+DPA(IPa1) | ||||
| ]]></artwork> | ||||
| </figure> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_on-demand" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>IP Mobility Handling in Distributed Anchoring Environments: Mobility | ||||
| Support Only When Needed</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| IP mobility support may be provided only when needed instead of being provided | ||||
| by default. Three cases can be considered: | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <ul spacing="normal"> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| Nomadic case: No address continuity is required. The IP address used by the MN | ||||
| changes after a movement and traffic using the old address is disrupted. If | ||||
| session continuity is required, then it needs to be provided by a solution | ||||
| running at Layer 4 or above. | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| Mobility case with traffic redirection: Address continuity is required. When the | ||||
| MN moves, the previous anchor still anchors the traffic using the old IP | ||||
| address and forwards it to the new MN's location. The MN obtains a new IP | ||||
| address anchored to the new location and preferably uses it for new | ||||
| communications established while connected at the new location. | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| <li> | ||||
| Mobility case with anchor relocation: Address continuity is required. In this ca | ||||
| se, | ||||
| the route followed by the traffic is optimized by using some means for traffic | ||||
| indirection to deviate from default routes. | ||||
| </li> | ||||
| </ul> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| A straightforward choice of mobility anchoring is the following: the MN | ||||
| chooses, as a source IP address for packets belonging to an IP flow, an | ||||
| address allocated by the network the MN is attached to when the flow was | ||||
| initiated. | ||||
| As such, traffic belonging to this flow traverses the MN's mobility anchor | ||||
| <xref target="I-D.seite-dmm-dma" format="default"/> <xref | ||||
| target="I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif" format="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The IP prefix/address at the MN's side of a flow may be anchored to the Access | ||||
| Router (AR) to which the MN is attached. For example, when 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 interface. In addition to configuring new | ||||
| link-local addresses, the MN configures from this prefix an IP address that is | ||||
| typically a dynamic IP address (meaning that this address is only used while the | ||||
| MN is attached to this access router, so the IP address configured by | ||||
| the MN dynamically changes when attaching to a different access network). It | ||||
| then uses this IP address when a flow is initiated. Packets from this flow | ||||
| addressed to the MN are simply forwarded according to the forwarding table. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| 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 different | ||||
| access networks. The network may advertise these prefixes with cost options | ||||
| <xref target="I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost" format="default"/> so that the mobile | ||||
| node may choose the one with the least cost. In addition, the IP | ||||
| prefixes/addresses provided by the network may be of different types regarding | ||||
| whether mobility support is supported <xref target="RFC8653" | ||||
| format="default"/>. An MN will need to choose which IP prefix/address to use | ||||
| for each flow according to whether or not it needs IP mobility support, | ||||
| for example, using the mechanisms described in <xref target="RFC8653" | ||||
| format="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_changing-anchor" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Nomadic Case</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| When IP mobility support is not needed for a flow, the LM and FM functions are | ||||
| not utilized so that the configurations in <xref target="sec_distributed-anchori | ||||
| ng-configurations" format="default"/> are simplified as shown in | ||||
| <xref target="fig_change-net" format="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <figure anchor="fig_change-net"> | ||||
| <name>Changing to a New IP Address/Prefix</name> | ||||
| <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
| Net1 Net2 | ||||
| +---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
| |AR1 | AR is changed |AR2 | | ||||
| +---------------+ -------> +---------------+ | ||||
| |CPA: | |CPA: | | ||||
| |---------------| |---------------| | ||||
| |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): | | ||||
| |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | | ||||
| +---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
| +...............+ +---------------+ | ||||
| .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2) | | ||||
| .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP2,...) | | ||||
| +...............+ +---------------+ | ||||
| ]]></artwork> | ||||
| </figure> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| 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 the new network. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Regardless of whether or not IP mobility is needed, if the flow has not terminat | ||||
| ed before | ||||
| the MN moves to a new network, the flow may subsequently restart using the new | ||||
| IP address assigned from the new network. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| When IP session continuity is needed, even if an application flow is ongoing as | ||||
| the MN moves, it may still be desirable for the application flow to change to | ||||
| using the new IP prefix configured in the new network. The application flow may | ||||
| then be closed at the IP level and then be restarted using a new IP address | ||||
| configured in the new network. Such a change in the IP address used by the | ||||
| application flow may be enabled using a higher-layer mobility support that is | ||||
| not in the scope of this document. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| In <xref target="fig_change-net" format="default"/>, a flow initiated while the | ||||
| MN was using the | ||||
| IP prefix IP1, anchored to a previous access router AR1 in network Net1, has | ||||
| terminated before the MN moves to a new network Net2. After moving to Net2, the | ||||
| MN uses the new IP prefix IP2, anchored to a new access router AR2 in network | ||||
| Net2, to start a new flow. Packets may then be forwarded without requiring IP-la | ||||
| yer mobility support. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| An example call flow is outlined in <xref target="fig_change-net-flow" | ||||
| format="default"/>. An MN attaches to AR1, which sends a router advertisement | ||||
| (RA) including information about the prefix assigned to the MN, from which the | ||||
| MN configures an IP address (IP1). This address is used for new | ||||
| communications, for example, with a correspondent node (CN). If the MN moves to | ||||
| a new network and attaches to AR2, the process is repeated (the MN obtains a new | ||||
| IP address, IP2, from AR2). Since the IP address (IP1) configured at the | ||||
| previously visited network is not valid at the current attachment point, | ||||
| any existing flows have to be reestablished using IP2. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Note that in these scenarios, if there is no mobility support provided by | ||||
| Layer 4 or | ||||
| above, application traffic would stop. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <figure anchor="fig_change-net-flow"> | ||||
| <name>Restarting a Flow with New IP Prefix/Address</name> | ||||
| <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
| MN AR1 AR2 CN | ||||
| |MN attaches to AR1: | | | | ||||
| |acquires MN-ID and profile | | | ||||
| |--RS---------------->| | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| Assigned prefix IP1 | | | | ||||
| IP1 address configuration | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |MN detaches from AR1 | | | | ||||
| |MN attaches to AR2 | | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |--RS------------------------------>| | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |<--------------RA(IP2)-------------| | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| Assigned prefix IP2 | | | | ||||
| IP2 address configuration | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+---------------------------->| | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| ]]></artwork> | ||||
| </figure> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_traffic_redirection" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Mobility Case with Traffic Redirection</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| When IP mobility is needed for a flow, the LM and FM functions in <xref target=" | ||||
| sec_distributed-anchoring-configurations" format="default"/> are utilized. There | ||||
| are two | ||||
| possible cases: (i) the mobility anchor remains playing that role and forwards t | ||||
| raffic to a new locator in the new network, and (ii) the mobility anchor (data-p | ||||
| lane | ||||
| function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/prefix. | ||||
| The latter enables optimized routes but requires some data-plane node that | ||||
| enforces traffic indirection. We focus on the first case in this section. The | ||||
| second case is addressed in <xref target="sec_anchor_relocation" | ||||
| format="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Mobility support can be provided by using mobility management methods, such as | ||||
| the approaches surveyed in the following academic papers: <xref | ||||
| target="IEEE-DISTRIBUTED-MOBILITY" format="default"/>, <xref target="PMIP-DMA" | ||||
| format="default"/>, and <xref target="DMM-MOBILE-INTERNET" | ||||
| format="default"/>. After moving, a certain MN's traffic flow may continue | ||||
| using the IP prefix from the prior network of attachment. Yet, some time | ||||
| later, the application generating this traffic flow may be closed. If the | ||||
| application is started again, the 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 dynamic IP prefix/address, rather than a permanent one, is | ||||
| used. Packets belonging to this flow may then use the new IP prefix (the one | ||||
| allocated in the network where the flow is being initiated). Routing is again | ||||
| kept simpler without employing IP mobility and will remain so as long as the | ||||
| MN, which is now in the new network, does not move again to another network. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| An example call flow in this case is outlined in <xref | ||||
| target="fig_flow-continuity" format="default"/>. In this example, the AR1 | ||||
| plays the role of the FM-DP entity and redirects the traffic (e.g., using an IP | ||||
| tunnel) to AR2. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <figure anchor="fig_flow-continuity"> | ||||
| <name>Flow Using IP Prefix from Home Network after MN has | ||||
| Moved</name> | ||||
| <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
| MN AR1 AR2 CN | ||||
| |MN attaches to AR1: | | | | ||||
| |acquires MN-ID and profile | | | ||||
| |--RS---------------->| | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| Assigned prefix IP1 | | | | ||||
| IP1 address configuration | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |MN detaches from AR1 | | | | ||||
| |MN attaches to AR2 | | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |--RS------------------------------>| | | ||||
| (some IP mobility support solution) | ||||
| |<--------------RA(IP2,IP1)---------| | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| | +<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)---------------------->| | ||||
| | +<===========>+ | | ||||
| |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-------------->+ | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| Assigned prefix IP2 | | | | ||||
| IP2 address configuration | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| Flow(IP1,IPcn) terminates | | | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| |<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+---------------------------->| | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| ]]></artwork> | ||||
| </figure> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Another solution could be to place an FM-DP entity closer to | ||||
| the CN network to perform traffic steering to deviate from default routes | ||||
| (which will bring the packet to AR1 per default routing). The LM and FM | ||||
| functions are implemented as shown in <xref target="fig_anchor-redirection" | ||||
| format="default"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <figure anchor="fig_anchor-redirection"> | ||||
| <name>Anchor Redirection</name> | ||||
| <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
| Net1 Net2 | ||||
| +---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
| |AR1 | |AR2 | | ||||
| +---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
| |CPA: | |CPA: | | ||||
| | | |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | | ||||
| |---------------| IP1 (anchored to Net1) |---------------| | ||||
| |DPA(IPa1): | is redirected to Net2 |DPA(IPa2): | | ||||
| |anchors IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2 | | ||||
| |FM:IP1 via IPa2| |FM:IP1 via IPa1| | ||||
| +---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
| +...............+ +---------------+ | ||||
| .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | | ||||
| .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | | ||||
| . . |flow(IP2,...) | | ||||
| +...............+ +---------------+ | ||||
| ]]></artwork> | ||||
| </figure> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Multiple instances of DPAs (at access routers), which are providing IP prefixes | ||||
| to the MNs, are needed to provide distributed mobility anchoring in an | ||||
| appropriate configuration such as those described in <xref target="fig_dmm_net-b | ||||
| ased" format="default"/> (<xref target="sec_distributed-anchoring-network-based" | ||||
| format="default"/>) for network-based | ||||
| distributed mobility or in <xref target="fig_dmm_client-based" format="default"/ | ||||
| > (<xref target="sec_distributed-anchoring-host-based" format="default"/>) for c | ||||
| lient-based distributed | ||||
| mobility. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section anchor="sec_anchor_relocation" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Mobility Case with Anchor Relocation</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| We focus next on the case where the mobility anchor (data-plane function) is | ||||
| changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/prefix. This enables optimized | ||||
| routes but requires some data-plane node that enforces traffic indirection. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| IP mobility is invoked to enable IP session continuity for an ongoing flow as | ||||
| the MN moves to a new network. The anchoring of the IP address of the flow is in | ||||
| the home network of the flow (i.e., different from the current network of | ||||
| attachment). A centralized mobility management mechanism may employ indirection | ||||
| from the anchor in the home network to the current network of attachment. Yet, i | ||||
| t | ||||
| may be difficult to avoid using an unnecessarily long route (when the route | ||||
| between the MN and the CN via the anchor in the home network is significantly | ||||
| longer than the direct route between them). An alternative is to move the IP | ||||
| prefix/address anchoring to the new network. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The IP prefix/address anchoring may move | ||||
| without changing the IP prefix/address of the flow. | ||||
| The LM function in <xref target="fig_dmm_net-based" format="default"/> of | ||||
| <xref target="sec_distributed-anchoring-network-based" format="default"/> | ||||
| is implemented as shown in <xref target="fig_anchor-mobility" format="default"/> | ||||
| . | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <figure anchor="fig_anchor-mobility"> | ||||
| <name>Anchor Relocation</name> | ||||
| <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
| Net1 Net2 | ||||
| +---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
| |AR1 | |AR2 | | ||||
| +---------------+ +---------------+ | ||||
| |CPA: | |CPA: | | ||||
| |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | |LM:IP1 at IPa2 | | ||||
| | 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) | | ||||
| .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | | ||||
| +...............+ +---------------+ | ||||
| ]]></artwork> | ||||
| </figure> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| 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 original IP prefix/address | ||||
| of the flow to the new network. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| One way to accomplish such a move is to use a centralized routing protocol, | ||||
| but such a solution may present some scalability concerns and its | ||||
| applicability is typically limited to small networks. One example of this type | ||||
| of solution is described in <xref target="I-D.ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp" | ||||
| format="default"/>. | ||||
| When an MN associates with an anchor, the anchor injects the MN's prefix into | ||||
| the global routing system. If the MN moves to a new anchor, the old anchor | ||||
| withdraws the /64 and the new anchor injects it instead. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section anchor="security" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Security Considerations</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| As stated in <xref target="RFC7333" format="default"/>, "a DMM solution <bcp14>M | ||||
| UST</bcp14> support any security | ||||
| protocols and mechanisms needed to secure the network and to make continuous | ||||
| security improvements". It "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> introduce new security risks | ||||
| ". | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| There are different potential deployment models of a DMM solution. The present | ||||
| document has presented three different scenarios for distributed anchoring: | ||||
| (i) nomadic case, (ii) mobility case with traffic redirection, and (iii) | ||||
| mobility case with anchor relocation. Each of these cases has different security | ||||
| requirements, and the actual security mechanisms depend on the specifics | ||||
| of each solution/scenario. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| As general rules, for the first distributed anchoring scenario (nomadic case), | ||||
| no additional security consideration is needed, as this does not involve any | ||||
| additional mechanism at Layer 3. If session connectivity is required, the | ||||
| Layer 4 or | ||||
| above solution used to provide it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> also provide the | ||||
| required authentication and security. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| The second and third distributed anchoring scenarios (mobility case) involve | ||||
| mobility signaling among the mobile node and the control-plane and data-plane | ||||
| anchors. The control-plane messages exchanged between these entities | ||||
| <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be protected using end-to-end security associations with | ||||
| data-integrity and data-origination capabilities. IPsec <xref target="RFC8221" | ||||
| format="default"/> Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) in transport mode with | ||||
| mandatory integrity protection <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be used for protecting | ||||
| the signaling messages. Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2) <xref t | ||||
| arget="RFC8247" format="default"/> | ||||
| <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be used to set up security associations between the data-p | ||||
| lane | ||||
| and control-plane anchors. Note that in scenarios in which traffic indirection | ||||
| mechanisms are used to relocate an anchor, authentication and authorization | ||||
| mechanisms <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be used. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Control-plane functionality <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> apply authorization checks to an | ||||
| y commands or | ||||
| updates that are made by the control-plane protocol. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>IANA Considerations</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| This document has no IANA actions. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| </middle> | ||||
| <back> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp" to="FPC-DMM-PROTOCOL"/> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif" to="IPV6-DMM-EXT"/> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp" to="BGP-ATN-IPS"/> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc" to="STATELESS-UP | ||||
| LANE-VEPC"/> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost" to="PREFIX-COST"/> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi" to="DMM-WIFI"/> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.seite-dmm-dma" to="DMM-DMA"/> | ||||
| <displayreference target="I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring" to="DMM-ENHANCED-ANC | ||||
| HORING"/> | ||||
| <references> | ||||
| <name>References</name> | ||||
| <references> | ||||
| <name>Normative References</name> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.2119.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.8174.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.7333.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.5213.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.6275.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.3753.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.7429.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.8221.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.8247.xml"/> | ||||
| </references> | ||||
| <references> | ||||
| <name>Informative References</name> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.6459.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
| FC.8653.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference. | ||||
| I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I | ||||
| -D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference. | ||||
| I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference. | ||||
| I-D.seite-dmm-dma.xml"/> | ||||
| <reference anchor='I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif'> | ||||
| <front> | ||||
| <title>Proxy Mobile IPv6 extensions for Distributed Mobility Management</title> | ||||
| <author initials='CJ' surname='Bernardos' fullname='Carlos Bernardos'> | ||||
| <organization /> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials='A' surname='Oliva' fullname='Antonio de la Oliva'> | ||||
| <organization /> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials='F' surname='Giust' fullname='Fabio Giust'> | ||||
| <organization /> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials='JC' surname='Zuniga' fullname='Juan Zuniga'> | ||||
| <organization /> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials='A' surname='Mourad' fullname='Alain Mourad'> | ||||
| <organization /> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <date month='March' year='2020' /> | ||||
| </front> | ||||
| <seriesInfo name='Internet-Draft' value='draft-ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif-06' /> | ||||
| </reference> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference. | ||||
| I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I | ||||
| -D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring.xml"/> | ||||
| <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference. | ||||
| I-D.ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp.xml"/> | ||||
| <reference anchor="DMM-MOBILE-INTERNET"> | ||||
| <front> | ||||
| <title>Distributed and Dynamic Mobility Management in Mobile | ||||
| Internet: Current Approaches and Issues</title> | ||||
| <author initials="H" surname="Chan"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials="H" surname="Yokota"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials="J" surname="Xie"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials="P" surname="Seite"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials="D" surname="Liu"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <date month="February" year="2011"/> | ||||
| </front> | ||||
| <refcontent>Journal of Communications, Vol. 6, No. 1 | ||||
| </refcontent> | ||||
| </reference> | ||||
| <reference anchor="IEEE-DISTRIBUTED-MOBILITY"> | ||||
| <front> | ||||
| <title>Distributed IP mobility management from the perspective of | ||||
| the IETF: motivations, requirements, approaches, comparison, and chal | ||||
| lenges</title> | ||||
| <author initials="J" surname="Lee"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials="J" surname="Bonnin"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials="P" surname="Seite"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <author initials="H. A." surname="Chan"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <date month="October" year="2013"/> | ||||
| </front> | ||||
| <refcontent>IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 159-168 | ||||
| </refcontent> | ||||
| </reference> | ||||
| <reference anchor="PMIP-DMA"> | ||||
| <front> | ||||
| <title>Proxy mobile IP with distributed mobility anchors</title> | ||||
| <author initials="H" surname="Chan"> | ||||
| <organization/> | ||||
| </author> | ||||
| <date month="December" year="2010"/> | ||||
| </front> | ||||
| <refcontent>IEEE Globecom Workshops Miami, FL, 2010, pp. 16-20 | ||||
| </refcontent> | ||||
| </reference> | ||||
| </references> | ||||
| </references> | ||||
| <section numbered="false"> | ||||
| <name>Acknowledgements | ||||
| </name> | ||||
| <t>The work of <contact fullname="Jong-Hyouk Lee"/> was supported by the MSIT (M | ||||
| inistry of Science | ||||
| and ICT), Korea, under the ITRC (Information Technology Research Center) | ||||
| support program (IITP-2020-2015-0-00403) supervised by the IITP (Institute for | ||||
| Information & communications Technology Planning & Evaluation). | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| <section numbered="false" toc="default"> | ||||
| <name>Contributors</name> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| <contact fullname="Alexandre Petrescu"/> and <contact fullname="Fred | ||||
| Templin"/> had contributed to earlier draft versions of this document regarding | ||||
| distributed anchoring for hierarchical networks and for network mobility, | ||||
| although these extensions were removed to keep the document within reasonable | ||||
| length. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| This document has benefited from other work on mobility support in SDN networks, | ||||
| on providing mobility support only when needed, and on mobility support in | ||||
| enterprise networks. These works have been referenced. While some of these | ||||
| authors have taken the work to jointly write this document, others have | ||||
| contributed at least indirectly by writing these works. The latter include | ||||
| <contact fullname="Philippe Bertin"/>, <contact fullname="Dapeng Liu"/>, | ||||
| <contact fullname="Satoru Matushima"/>, <contact fullname="Pierrick Seite"/>, | ||||
| <contact fullname="Jouni Korhonen"/>, | ||||
| and <contact fullname="Sri Gundavelli"/>. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| For completeness, some terminology from draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models-04 | ||||
| has been incorporated into this document. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| <t> | ||||
| Valuable comments have been received from <contact fullname="John | ||||
| Kaippallimalil"/>, <contact fullname="ChunShan Xiong"/>, <contact | ||||
| fullname="Dapeng Liu"/>, <contact fullname="Fred Templin"/>, <contact | ||||
| fullname="Paul Kyzivat"/>, <contact fullname="Joseph Salowey"/>, <contact | ||||
| fullname="Yoshifumi Nishida"/>, <contact fullname="Carlos Pignataro"/>, | ||||
| <contact fullname="Mirja Kuehlewind"/>, <contact fullname="Eric Vyncke"/>, | ||||
| <contact fullname="Qin Wu"/>, <contact fullname="Warren Kumari"/>, <contact | ||||
| fullname="Benjamin Kaduk"/>, <contact fullname="Roman Danyliw"/>, and <contact | ||||
| fullname="Barry Leiba"/>. <contact fullname="Dirk von Hugo"/>, <contact | ||||
| fullname="Byju Pularikkal"/>, and <contact fullname="Pierrick Seite"/> have | ||||
| generously provided careful review with helpful corrections and | ||||
| suggestions. <contact fullname="Marco Liebsch"/> and <contact fullname="Lyle | ||||
| Bertz"/> also performed very detailed and helpful reviews of this document. | ||||
| </t> | ||||
| </section> | ||||
| </back> | ||||
| </rfc> | ||||
| End of changes. 1 change blocks. | ||||
| lines changed or deleted | lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||