[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 RFC 4140

Network Working Group                            Hesham Soliman, Flarion
INTERNET-DRAFT                                 Claude Catelluccia, INRIA
Expires: June 2005                              Karim El Malki, Ericsson
                                                  Ludovic Bellier, INRIA
                                                          December, 2004



           Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 mobility management (HMIPv6)
                    <draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-04.txt>


Status of this memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, we certify that any applicable
   patent or other IPR claims of which I am (we are) aware have been
   disclosed, and any of which we become aware will be disclosed, in
   accordance with RFC 3668 (BCP 79).

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, we accept the provisions of
   Section 4 of RFC 3667 (BCP 78).

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
   groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or cite them other than as "work in progress".

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/lid-abstracts.txt

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This document is a submission of the IETF MIPSHOP WG. Comments should
   be directed to the MIPSHOP WG mailing list, mipshop@ietf.org.

Abstract

   This document introduces extensions to Mobile IPv6 and IPv6 Neighbour
   Discovery to allow for local mobility handling. Hierarchical mobility
   management for Mobile IPv6 is designed to reduce the amount of
   signalling between the Mobile Node, its Correspondent Nodes and its
   Home Agent. The Mobility Anchor Point described in this document can
   also be used to improve the performance of Mobile IPv6 in terms of
   handover speed.




Soliman, et al.                                                 [Page 1]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004



Table of Contents

  1. Introduction.....................................................3
  2. Terminology......................................................4
  3. Overview of HMIPv6...............................................4
     3.1. HMIPv6 Operation............................................5
  4. Mobile IPv6 extensions...........................................7
     4.1. Local Binding Update........................................7
  5. Neighbour Discovery extension - The MAP option message format....8
  6. Protocol operation...............................................9
     6.1. Mobile node Operation.......................................9
        6.1.1. Sending packets to correspondent nodes................11
     6.2. MAP Operations.............................................11
     6.3. Home Agent Operations......................................12
     6.4. Correspondent node Operations..............................12
     6.5. Local Mobility Management optimisation within a MAP domain.12
     6.6. Location Privacy...........................................13
  7. MAP discovery...................................................13
     7.1. Dynamic MAP Discovery......................................13
        7.1.1. Router Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery............14
        7.1.2. MAP Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery...............14
     7.2. Mobile node Operation......................................15
  8. Updating previous MAPs..........................................15
  9. Notes on MAP selection by the mobile node.......................16
     9.1. MAP selection in a distributed-MAP environment.............16
     9.2. MAP selection in a flat mobility management architecture...17
  10. Detection and recovery from MAP failures.......................18
  11. IANA Considerations............................................18
  12. Security considerations........................................19
     12.1. Mobile node-MAP security..................................19
     12.2. Mobile node-correspondent node security...................20
     12.3. Mobile node-Home Agent security...........................21
  13. Acknowledgments................................................21
  14. Authors' Addresses.............................................21
  15. References.....................................................22
     15.1. Normative references......................................22
     15.2. Informative References....................................23
  Appendix A - Fast Mobile IPv6 Handovers and HMIPv6.................24















Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 2]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


1. Introduction

   This memo introduces the concept of a Hierarchical Mobile IPv6
   network, utilising a new node called the Mobility Anchor Point (MAP).

   Mobile IPv6 [1] allows nodes to move within the Internet topology
   while maintaining reachability and on-going connections between
   mobile and correspondent nodes. To do this a mobile node sends
   Binding Updates (BUs) to its Home Agent (HA) and all Correspondent
   Nodes (CNs) it communicates with, every time it moves. Authenticating
   binding updates requires approximately 1.5 round trip times between
   the mobile node and each correspondent node (for the entire return
   routability procedure in a best case scenario, i.e. no packet
   losses). In addition, one round trip time is needed to update the
   Home Agent, this can be done simultaneously while updating
   correspondent nodes. The re-use of the home cookie (i.e. eliminating
   HOTI/HOT) will not reduce the number of round trip times needed to
   update correspondent nodes. These round trip delays will disrupt
   active connections every time a handoff to a new AR is performed.
   Eliminating this additional delay element from the time-critical
   handover period will significantly improve the performance of Mobile
   IPv6. Moreover, in the case of wireless links, such solution reduces
   the number of messages sent over the air interface to all
   correspondent nodes and the Home Agent. A local anchor point will
   also allow Mobile IPv6 to benefit from reduced mobility signalling
   with external networks.

   For these reasons a new Mobile IPv6 node, called the Mobility Anchor
   Point is used and can be located at any level in a hierarchical
   network of routers, including the Access Router (AR). Unlike Foreign
   Agents in IPv4, a MAP is not required on each subnet. The MAP will
   limit the amount of Mobile IPv6 signalling outside the local domain.
   The introduction of the MAP provides a solution to the issues
   outlined earlier in the following way:

   - The mobile node sends Binding Updates to the local MAP rather than
   the HA (that is typically further away) and CNs

   - Only one Binding Update message needs to be transmitted by the MN
   before traffic from the HA and all CNs is re-routed to its new
   location. This is independent of the number of CNs that the MN is
   communicating with.

   A MAP is essentially a local Home Agent. The aim of introducing the
   hierarchical mobility management model in Mobile IPv6 is to enhance
   the performance of Mobile IPv6 while minimising the impact on Mobile
   IPv6 or other IPv6 protocols. It also supports Fast Mobile IPv6
   Handovers to help Mobile Nodes in achieving seamless mobility (see
   Appendix A). Furthermore, HMIPv6 allows mobile nodes to hide their
   location from correspondent nodes and Home Agents while using Mobile
   IPv6 route optimisation.



Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 3]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


2. Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD, "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [10].

   In addition, new terms are defined below:


      Access Router (AR)     The Mobile Node's default router. The AR
                             aggregates the outbound traffic of mobile
                             nodes.

      Mobility Anchor Point  A Mobility Anchor Point is a router located
      (MAP)                  in a network visited by the mobile node.
                             The MAP is used by the MN as a local HA.
                             One or more MAPs can exist within a visited
                             network.

      Regional Care-of       An RCoA is an address obtained by the
      Address (RCoA)         mobile node from the visited network. An
                             RCoA is an address on the MAP's subnet. It
                             is auto-configured by the mobile node when
                             receiving the MAP option.

      HMIPv6-aware           An HMIPv6-aware mobile node is a mobile
      Mobile Node            node that can receive and process the MAP
                             option received from its default router.
                             An HMIPv6-aware Mobile Node must also be
                             able to send local binding updates
                             (Binding Update with the M flag set).

      On-link CoA (LCoA)     The LCoA is the on-link CoA configured on
                             a mobile node's interface based on the
                             prefix advertised by its default router.
                             In [1] this is simply referred to as the
                             Care-of-address. However, in this memo LCoA
                             is used to distinguish it from the RCoA.

      Local Binding Update   The MN sends a Local Binding Update to the
                             MAP in order to establish a binding
                             between the RCoA and LCoA.


3. Overview of HMIPv6

   This Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 scheme introduces a new function, the
   MAP, and minor extensions to the mobile node operation. The
   correspondent node and Home Agent operation will not be affected.





Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 4]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   Just like Mobile IPv6, this solution is independent of the underlying
   access technology, allowing mobility within or between different
   types of access networks.

   A mobile node entering a MAP domain will receive Router
   Advertisements containing information on one or more local MAPs. The
   MN can bind its current location (on-link CoA) with an address on the
   MAP's subnet (RCoA). Acting as a local HA, the MAP will receive all
   packets on behalf of the mobile node it is serving and will
   encapsulate and forward them directly to the mobile node's current
   address. If the mobile node changes its current address within a
   local MAP domain (LCoA), it only needs to register the new address
   with the MAP. Hence, only the Regional CoA (RCoA) needs to be
   registered with correspondent nodes and the HA. The RCoA does not
   change as long as the MN moves within a MAP domain (see below for
   definition). This makes the mobile node's mobility transparent to the
   correspondent nodes it is communicating with.

   A MAP domain's boundaries are defined by the Access Routers (ARs)
   advertising the MAP information to the attached Mobile Nodes.
   The detailed extensions to Mobile IPv6 and operations of the
   different nodes will be explained later in this document.

   It should be noted that the HMIPv6 concept is simply an extension to
   the Mobile IPv6 protocol. An HMIPv6-aware mobile node with an
   implementation of Mobile IPv6 SHOULD choose to use the MAP when
   discovering such capability in a visited network. However, in some
   cases the mobile node may prefer to simply use the standard Mobile
   IPv6 implementation. For instance, the mobile node may be located in
   a visited network within its home site. In this case, the HA is
   located near the visited network and could be used instead of a MAP.
   In this scenario, the mobile node would only update the HA whenever
   it moves. The method to determine whether the HA is in the vicinity
   of the MN (e.g. same site) is outside the scope of this document.

3.1. HMIPv6 Operation

   The network architecture shown in Figure 1 illustrates an example of
   the use of the MAP in a visited network.

   In Figure 1, the MAP can help in providing seamless mobility for the
   mobile node as it moves from Access Router 1 (AR1) to Access Router 2
   (AR2), while communicating with the correspondent node. A multi-level
   hierarchy is not required for a higher handover performance. Hence,
   it is sufficient to locate one or more MAPs (possibly covering the
   same domain) at any position in the operator's network.








Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 5]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


             +-------+
             |  HA   |
             +-------+       +----+
                 |           | CN |
                 |           +----+
                 |             |
                 +-------+-----+
                         |
                         |RCoA
                     +-------+
                     |  MAP  |
                     +-------+
                      |     |
                      |     +--------+
                      |              |
                      |              |
                  +-----+         +-----+
                  | AR1 |         | AR2 |
                  +-----+         +-----+
                     LCoA1         LCoA2

                 +----+
                 | MN |
                 +----+   ------------>
                            Movement

          Figure 1: Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 domain


   Upon arrival in a visited network, the mobile node will discover the
   global address of the MAP. This address is stored in the Access
   Routers and communicated to the mobile node via Router Advertisements
   (RAs). A new option for RAs is defined later in this specification.
   This is needed to inform mobile nodes about the presence of the MAP
   (MAP discovery). The discovery phase will also inform the mobile node
   of the distance of the MAP from the mobile node. For example, the MAP
   function could be implemented as shown in Figure 1 and at the same
   time also in AR1 and AR2. In this case the mobile node can choose the
   first hop MAP or one further up in the hierarchy of routers. The
   details on how to choose a MAP are provided in section 10.

   The process of MAP discovery continues as the mobile node moves from
   one subnet to the next. Every time the mobile node detects movement,
   it will also detect whether it is still in the same MAP domain. The
   router advertisement used to detect movement will also inform the
   mobile node, through the MAP option, whether it is still in the same
   MAP domain. As the mobile node roams within a MAP domain, it will
   continue to receive the same MAP option included in router
   advertisements from its AR. If a change in the advertised MAP's
   address is received, the mobile node MUST act on the change by
   sending Binding Updates to its HA and correspondent nodes.



Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 6]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004



   If the mobile node is not HMIPv6-aware then no MAP Discovery will be
   performed, resulting in the mobile node using the Mobile IPv6 [1]
   protocol for its mobility management. On the other hand, if the
   mobile node is HMIPv6-aware it SHOULD choose to use its HMIPv6
   implementation. If so, the mobile node will first need to register
   with a MAP by sending it a BU containing its Home Address and on-link
   address (LCoA). The Home address used in the BU is the RCoA. The MAP
   MUST store this information in its Binding Cache to be able to
   forward packets to their final destination when received from the
   different correspondent nodes or HAs.

   The mobile node will always need to know the original sender of any
   received packets to determine if route optimisation is required. This
   information will be available to the mobile node since the MAP does
   not modify the contents of the original packet. Normal processing of
   the received packets (as described in [1]) will give the mobile node
   the necessary information.

   To use the network bandwidth in a more efficient manner, a mobile
   node may decide to register with more than one MAP simultaneously and
   use each MAP address for a specific group of correspondent nodes. For
   example, in Fig 1, if the correspondent node happens to exist on the
   same link as the mobile node, it would be more efficient to use the
   first hop MAP (in this case assume it is AR1) for communication
   between them. This will avoid sending all packets via the "highest"
   MAP in the hierarchy and hence result in a more efficient usage of
   network bandwidth. The mobile node can also use its current on-link
   address (LCoA) as a CoA as specified in [1]. Note that the mobile
   node MUST NOT present an RCoA from a MAP's subnet as an LCoA in a
   binding update sent to another MAP. The LCoA included in the binding
   update MUST be the mobile node's address derived from the prefix
   advertised on its link.

   If a router advertisement is used for MAP discovery, as described in
   this document, all ARs belonging to the MAP domain MUST advertise the
   MAP's IP address. The same concept (of advertising the MAP's presence
   within its domain) should be used if other methods of MAP discovery
   are introduced in future.

4. Mobile IPv6 extensions

   This section outlines the extensions proposed to the binding update
   specified in [1].

4.1. Local Binding Update

   A new flag is added; the M flag that indicates MAP registration. When
   a mobile node registers with the MAP, the M and A flags MUST be set
   to distinguish this registration from a BU being sent to the HA or a
   correspondent node.



Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 7]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004



     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
                                    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                    |            Sequence #         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |A|H|L|K|M|      Reserved       |            Lifetime           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    .                                                               .
    .                        Mobility Options                       .
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

    Description of extensions to the binding update:

        M              If set to 1 it indicates a MAP registration.

   It should be noted that this is an extension to the Binding update
   specified in [1].

5. Neighbour Discovery extension - The MAP option message format

       0                   1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |     Type      |    Length     |  Dist |  Pref |R|  Reserved   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Valid Lifetime                           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      +                                                               +
      |                                                               |
      +                  Global IP Address for MAP                    +
      |                                                               |
      +                                                               +
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


      Fields:

          Type            IPv6 Neighbor Discovery option. TBA.

          Length          8-bit unsigned integer. The length of the
                          option and MUST be set to 3.


          Dist            A 4 bit unsigned integer identifying the
                          Distance Between MAP and the receiver of the
                          advertisement. Its default value SHOULD be set



Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 8]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


                          to 1 if Dynamic MAP discovery is used. The
                          Distance MUST be set to 1 if the MAP is on the
                          same link as the mobile node. This field need
                          not be interpreted as the number of hops
                          between MAP and the mobile node. The only
                          requirement is that the meaning of the
                          Distance field is consistently interpreted
                          within one Domain. A Distance value of Zero
                          MUST NOT be used.

          Pref            The preference of a MAP. A 4 bit unsigned
                          integer. A decimal value of 15 indicates the
                          highest availability.

          R               When set to 1 it indicates that the mobile
                          node MUST form an RCoA based on the prefix in
                          the MAP option.

          Valid Lifetime  The minimum value (in seconds) of both the
                          preferred and valid lifetimes of the prefix
                          assigned to the MAP's subnet. This value
                          indicates the validity of the MAP's address
                          and consequently the time for which the RCoA
                          is valid.

         Global Address   One of the MAP's global addresses.
                          The 64-bit prefix extracted from this address
                          MUST be configured in the MAP to be used for
                          RCoA construction by the mobile node.

   Although not explicitly included in the MAP option, the prefix length
   of the MAP's Global IP address MUST be 64. This prefix is the one
   used by the mobile node to form an RCoA, by appending a 64-bit
   identifier to the prefix. Hence the need for having a static prefix
   length for the MAP's subnet.

6. Protocol operation

   This section describes the HMIPv6 protocol. In HMIPv6, the mobile
   node has two addresses, an RCoA on the MAP's link and an on-link CoA
   (LCoA). This RCoA is formed in a stateless manner by combining the
   mobile node's interface identifier and the subnet prefix received in
   the MAP option.

   As illustrated in this section, this protocol requires updating the
   mobile nodes' implementation only. The HA and correspondent node are
   unchanged. The MAP performs the function of a "local" HA that binds
   the mobile node's RCoA to an LCoA.

6.1. Mobile node Operation




Soliman, et. al                                                 [Page 9]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   When a mobile node moves into a new MAP domain (i.e. its MAP
   changes), it needs to configure two CoAs: an RCoA on the MAP's link
   and an on-link CoA (LCoA). The RCoA is formed in a stateless manner.
   After forming the RCoA based on the prefix received in the MAP
   option, the mobile node sends a local BU to the MAP with the A and M
   flags set. The local BU is a BU defined in [1] and includes the
   mobile node's RCoA in the Home Address Option. No alternate-CoA
   option is needed in this message. The LCoA is used as the source
   address of the BU. This BU will bind the mobile node's RCoA (similar
   to a Home Address) to its LCoA. The MAP (acting as a HA) will then
   perform DAD (when a new binding is being created) for the mobile
   node's RCoA on its link and return a Binding Acknowledgement to the
   MN. This acknowledgement identifies the binding as successful or
   contains the appropriate fault code. No new error codes need to be
   supported by the mobile node for this operation. The mobile node MUST
   silently ignore binding acknowledgements that do not contain a
   routing header type 2, which includes the mobile node's RCoA.

   Following a successful registration with the MAP, a bi-directional
   tunnel between the mobile node and the MAP is established. All
   packets sent by the mobile node are tunnelled to the MAP. The outer
   header contains the mobile node's LCoA in the source address field
   and the MAP's address in the destination address field. The inner
   header contains the mobile node's RCoA in the source address field
   and the peer's address in the destination address field. Similarly,
   all packets addressed to the mobile node's RCoA are intercepted by
   the MAP and tunnelled to the mobile node's LCoA.

   This specification allows a mobile node to use more than one RCoA if
   it received more than one MAP option. In this case, the mobile node
   MUST perform the binding update procedure for each RCoA. In addition,
   the mobile node MUST NOT use one RCoA (e.g. RCoA1) derived from a
   MAP's prefix (e.g. MAP1) as a care-of address in its binding update
   to another MAP (e.g. MAP2). This would force packets to be
   encapsulated several times (twice in this example) on their path to
   the mobile node. This form of multi-level hierarchy will reduce the
   protocol's efficiency and performance.

   After registering with the MAP, the mobile node MUST register its new
   RCoA with its HA by sending a BU that specifies the binding (RCoA,
   Home Address) as in Mobile IPv6. The mobile node's Home Address is
   used in the home address option and the RCoA is used as the care-of
   address in the source address field. The mobile node may also send a
   similar BU (i.e. that specifies the binding between the Home Address
   and the RCoA) to its current correspondent nodes.

   The mobile node SHOULD wait for the binding acknowledgement from the
   MAP before registering with its HA. It should be noted that when
   binding the RCoA with the HA and correspondent nodes, the binding
   lifetime MUST NOT be larger than the mobile node's binding lifetime
   with the MAP, which is received in the Binding Acknowledgement.



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 10]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004



   In order to speed up the handover between MAPs and reduce packet
   loss, a mobile node SHOULD send a local BU to its previous MAP
   specifying its new LCoA. Packets in transit that reach the previous
   MAP are then forwarded to the new LCoA.

   The MAP will receive packets addressed to the mobile node's RCoA
   (from the HA or correspondent nodes). Packets will be tunnelled from
   the MAP to the mobile node's LCoA. The mobile node will de-capsulate
   the packets and process them in the normal manner.

   When the mobile node moves within the same MAP domain, it should only
   register its new LCoA with its MAP. In this case, the RCoA remains
   unchanged.

   Note that a mobile node may send a BU containing its LCoA (instead of
   its RCoA) to correspondent nodes, which are connected to its same
   link. Packets will then be routed directly without going through the
   MAP.

6.1.1. Sending packets to correspondent nodes

   The mobile node can communicate with a correspondent node through the
   HA, or in a route-optimised manner, as described in [1]. When
   communicating through the HA, the message formats in [1] can be
   re-used.

   If the mobile node communicates directly with the correspondent node
   (i.e. the CN has a binding cache entry for the mobile node), the
   mobile node MUST use the same care-of address used to create a
   binding cache entry in the correspondent node (RCoA) as a source
   address. According to [1], the mobile node MUST also include a Home
   Address option in outgoing packets. The Home address option MUST
   contain the mobile node's home address.

6.2. MAP Operations

   The MAP acts like a HA; it intercepts all packets addressed to
   registered mobile nodes and tunnels them to the corresponding LCoA,
   which is stored in its binding cache.

   A MAP has no knowledge of the mobile node's Home address. The mobile
   node will send a local BU to the MAP with the M and A flags set. The
   aim of this BU is to inform the MAP that the mobile node has formed
   an RCoA (contained in the BU as a Home address). If successful, the
   MAP MUST return a binding acknowledgement to the mobile node
   indicating a successful registration. This is identical to the HA
   operation in [1]. No new error codes are introduced for HMIPv6. The
   binding acknowledgement MUST include a routing header type 2 that
   contains the mobile node's RCoA.




Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 11]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   The MAP MUST be able to accept packets tunnelled from the mobile
   node, with the mobile node being the tunnel entry point and the MAP
   being the tunnel exit point.

   The MAP acts as a HA for the RCoA. Packets addressed to the RCOA are
   intercepted by the MAP, using proxy Neighbour Advertisement,
   encapsulated and routed to the mobile node's LCoA. This operation is
   identical to that of the HA described in [1].

   A MAP MAY be configured with the list of valid on-link prefixes that
   mobile nodes can use to derive LCoAs. This is useful for network
   operators to stop mobile nodes from continuing to use the MAP after
   moving to a different administrative domain. If a mobile node sent a
   binding update containing an LCoA that is not in the MAP's "valid
   on-link prefixes" list, the MAP could reject the binding update using
   existing error code 129 (administratively prohibited).

6.3. Home Agent Operations

   The support of HMIPv6 is completely transparent to the HA's
   operation. Packets addressed to a mobile node's Home Address will be
   forwarded by the HA to its RCoA as described in [1].

6.4. Correspondent node Operations

   HMIPv6 is completely transparent to correspondent nodes.

6.5. Local Mobility Management optimisation within a MAP domain

   In [1], it is stated that for short-term communication, particularly
   communication that may easily be retried upon failure, the mobile
   node MAY choose to directly use one of its care-of addresses as the
   source of the packet, thus not requiring the use of a Home Address
   option in the packet. Such use of the CoA will reduce the overhead of
   sending each packet due to the absence of additional options. In
   addition, it will provide an optimal route between the mobile node
   and correspondent node.

   In HMIPv6, a mobile node can use its RCoA as the source address
   without using a Home Address option. In other words, the RCoA can be
   used as a potential source address for upper layers. Using this
   feature, the mobile node will be seen by the correspondent node as a
   fixed node while moving within a MAP domain.

   This usage of the RCoA does not have the cost of Mobile IPv6 (i.e. no
   bindings or home address options are sent over the Internet) but
   still provides local mobility management to the mobile nodes.
   Although such use of RCoA does not provide global mobility (i.e.
   communication is broken when a mobile host moves to a new MAP), it
   would be useful for several applications (e.g. web browsing). The
   validity of the RCoA as a source address used by applications will



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 12]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   depend on the size of a MAP domain and the speed of the mobile node.
   Furthermore, since the support for BU processing in correspondent
   nodes is not mandated in [1], this mechanism can provide a way of
   obtaining route optimisation without sending BUs to the correspondent
   nodes.

   Enabling this mechanism can be done by presenting the RCoA as a
   temporary home address for the mobile node. This may require an
   implementation to augment its source address selection algorithm with
   the knowledge of the RCoA in order to use it for the appropriate
   applications.

6.6. Location Privacy

   In HMIPv6, a mobile node hides its LCoA from its corresponding nodes
   and its home agent by using its RCoA in the source field of the
   packets that it sends. As a result, the location tracking of a mobile
   node by its corresponding nodes or its home agent is difficult since
   they only know its RCoA and not its LCoA.

7. MAP discovery

   This section describes how a mobile node obtains the MAP address and
   subnet prefix and how ARs in a domain discover MAPs. Two different
   methods for MAP discovery are defined below.

   Dynamic MAP Discovery is based on propagating the MAP option in
   Router Advertisements from the MAP to the mobile node through certain
   (configured) router interfaces within the routers in an operator's
   network. This requires manual configuration of the MAP and the
   routers receiving the MAP option to allow them to propagate the
   option on certain interfaces. To ensure a secure communication
   between routers, router advertisements that are sent between routers
   for Dynamic MAP discovery SHOULD be authenticated (e.g. using AH,
   ESP, or SEND). In the case where this authentication is not possible
   (e.g. third party routers exist between the MAP and ARs), a network
   operator may prefer to manually configure all the ARs to send the MAP
   option as described in this document.

   Manual configuration of the MAP option information in ARs and other
   MAPs in the same domain is the default mechanism. It should also be
   possible to configure ARs and MAPs to enable dynamic mechanisms for
   MAP Discovery.

7.1. Dynamic MAP Discovery

   The process of MAP discovery can be performed in different ways.
   Router advertisements are used for Dynamic MAP Discovery by
   introducing a new option. The access router is required to send the
   MAP option in its router advertisements. This option includes the
   distance vector from the mobile node (which may not imply the real



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 13]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   distance in terms of the number of hops), the preference for this
   particular MAP, the MAP's global IP address and subnet prefix

7.1.1. Router Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery

   The ARs within a MAP domain may be configured dynamically with the
   information related to the MAP options. ARs may obtain this
   information by listening for RAs with MAP options. Each MAP in the
   network needs to be configured with a default preference, the right
   interfaces to send this option on and the IP address to be sent. The
   initial value of the "Distance" field MAY be set to a default value
   of 1 and MUST NOT be set to zero. Routers in the MAP domain should be
   configured to re-send the MAP option on certain interfaces.

   Upon reception of a router advertisement with the MAP option, the
   receiving router MUST copy the option and re-send it after
   incrementing the Distance field by one. If the receiving router was
   also a MAP, it MUST send its own option together with the received
   option in the same advertisement. If a router receives more than one
   MAP option for the same MAP (i.e. the same IP address in the MAP
   option), from two different interfaces, it MUST choose the option
   with the smallest distance field.

   In this manner, information about one or more MAPs can be dynamically
   passed to a mobile node. Furthermore, by performing the discovery
   phase in this way, different MAP nodes are able to change their
   preferences dynamically based on the local policies, node overload or
   other load sharing protocols being used.

7.1.2. MAP Operation for Dynamic MAP Discovery

   A MAP will be configured to send its option or relay MAP options
   belonging to other MAPs onto certain interfaces. The choice of
   interfaces is done by the network administrator (i.e. manual
   configuration) and depends on the network topology. A default
   preference value of 10 may be assigned to each MAP. It should be
   noted that a MAP can change its preference value at any time due to
   various reasons (e.g. node overload or load sharing). A preference
   value of zero means that the MAP SHOULD NOT be chosen by new mobile
   nodes. This value could be reached in cases of node overload or
   partial node failures.

   The MAP option is propagated towards ARs in its domain. Each router
   along the path to an AR will increment the Distance field by one. If
   a router that is also a MAP receives advertisements from other MAPs,
   it MUST add its own MAP option and propagate both options to the next
   router or to the AR (if it has direct connectivity with the AR).







Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 14]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


7.2. Mobile node Operation

   When an HMIPv6-aware mobile node receives a router advertisement, it
   should search for the MAP option. One or more options may be found
   for different MAP IP addresses.

   A mobile node SHOULD register with the MAP having the highest
   preference value. A MAP with a preference value of zero SHOULD NOT be
   used for new local BUs (i.e. the mobile node can refresh existing
   bindings but cannot create new ones). A mobile node MAY however
   choose to register with one MAP over another depending on the value
   received in the Distance field, provided that the preference value is
   above zero.

   A MAP option containing a valid lifetime value of zero means that
   this MAP MUST NOT be selected by the MN. A valid lifetime of zero
   indicates a MAP failure. When this option is received, a mobile node
   MUST choose another MAP and create new bindings. Any existing
   bindings with this MAP can be assumed to be lost. If no other MAP is
   available the mobile node MUST revert to using the Mobile IPv6
   protocol as specified in [1].

   If a multihomed mobile node has access to several ARs simultaneously
   (on different interfaces), it SHOULD use an LCoA on the link defined
   by the AR that advertises its current MAP.

   A mobile node MUST store the received option(s) to choose at least
   one MAP to register with. Storing the options is essential as they
   will be compared to other options received later for the purpose of
   the movement detection algorithm.

   If no MAP options are found in the router advertisement, the mobile
   node MUST use the Mobile IPv6 protocol as specified in [1].

   If the R flag is set, the mobile node MUST use its RCoA as the Home
   Address when performing the MAP registration. RCoA is then bound to
   the LCoA in the MAP's Binding Cache.

   A mobile node MAY choose to register with more than one MAP
   simultaneously or use both the RCoA and its LCoA as care-of addresses
   simultaneously with different correspondent nodes.

8. Updating previous MAPs

   When a mobile node moves into a new MAP domain, the mobile node may
   send a BU to the previous MAP requesting it to forward packets
   addressed to the mobile node's new CoA. An administrator MAY restrict
   the MAP from forwarding packets to LCoAs outside the MAP's domain.
   However, it is RECOMMENDED that MAPs be allowed to forward packets to
   LCoAs associated with some of the ARs in neighbouring MAP domains,
   provided that they are located within the same administrative domain.



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 15]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   For instance, a MAP could be configured to forward packets to LCoAs
   associated with ARs that are geographically adjacent to ARs on the
   boundary of its domain. This will allow for a smooth inter-MAP
   handover as it allows the mobile node to continue to receive packets
   while updating the new MAP, its HA and, potentially, correspondent
   nodes.

9. Notes on MAP selection by the mobile node

   HMIPv6 provides a flexible mechanism for local mobility management
   within a visited network. As explained earlier a MAP can exist
   anywhere in the operator's network (including the AR). Several MAPs
   can be located within the same domain independently of each other. In
   addition, overlapping MAP domains are also allowed and recommended.
   Both static and dynamic hierarchies are supported.

   When the mobile node receives a router advertisement including a MAP
   option, it should perform actions according to the following movement
   detection mechanisms. In a Hierarchical Mobile IP network such as the
   one described in this draft, the mobile node should be:

      - "Eager" to perform new bindings
      - "Lazy" in releasing existing bindings

   The above means that the mobile node should register with any "new"
   MAP advertised by the AR (Eager). The method by which the mobile node
   determines whether the MAP is a "new" MAP is described in section
   9.1. The mobile node should not release existing bindings until it no
   longer receives the MAP option (or receives it with a lifetime of
   zero) or the lifetime of its existing binding expires (Lazy). This
   Eager-Lazy approach described above will assist in providing a
   fallback mechanism in case of the failure of one of the MAP routers,
   as it would reduce the time it takes for a mobile node to inform its
   correspondent nodes and HA about its new care-of address.

9.1. MAP selection in a distributed-MAP environment

   The mobile node needs to consider several factors to optimally select
   one or more MAPs, where several MAPs are available in the same
   domain.

   There are no benefits foreseen in selecting more than one MAP and
   forcing packets to be sent from the higher MAP down through a
   hierarchy of MAPs. This approach may add forwarding delays and
   eliminate the robustness of IP routing between the highest MAP and
   the mobile node; it is therefore prohibited by this specification.
   Hence, allowing more than one MAP ("above" the AR) within a network
   should not imply that the mobile node forces packets to be routed
   down the hierarchy of MAPs. However, placing more than one MAP
   "above" the AR can be used for redundancy and as an optimisation for
   the different mobility scenarios experienced by mobile nodes. The



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 16]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   MAPs are used independently from each other by the MN (e.g. each MAP
   is used for communication to a certain set of CNs).

   In terms of the Distance-based selection in a network with several
   MAPs, a mobile node may choose to register with the furthest MAP to
   avoid frequent re-registrations. This is particularly important for
   fast mobile nodes that will perform frequent handoffs. In this
   scenario, the choice of a more distant MAP would reduce the
   probability of having to change a MAP and informing all correspondent
   nodes and the HA. This specification does not provide an algorithm
   for the distance-based MAP selection. However, such algorithm may be
   introduced in future extensions utilising information about the speed
   of mobility from lower layers.

   In a scenario where several MAPs are discovered by the mobile node in
   one domain, the mobile node may need some sophisticated algorithms to
   be able to select the appropriate MAP. These algorithms would have
   the mobile node speed as an input (for distance based selection)
   combined with the preference field in the MAP option. However, this
   specification proposes that the mobile node uses the following
   algorithm as a default, where other optimised algorithms are not
   available. The following algorithm is simply based on selecting the
   MAP that is most distant, provided that its preference value did not
   reach a value of zero. The mobile node operation is shown below:

   1. Receive and parse all MAP options
   2. Arrange MAPs in a descending order, starting with the furthest
     away MAP (i.e. MAP option having largest Dist field)
   3. Select first MAP in list
   4. If either the Preference value or the valid lifetime fields are
     set to zero, select the following MAP in the list.
   5. Repeat step (4) while new MAP options still exist until a MAP is
     found with preference value and valid lifetime different from
     zero.

   Implementing the steps above would result in mobile nodes selecting
   by default the most distant or furthest available MAP by default.
   This will continue to take place, until the preference value reduces
   to zero. Following this, mobile nodes will start selecting another
   MAP.

9.2. MAP selection in a flat mobility management architecture

   Network operators may choose a flat architecture in some cases where
   a Mobile IPv6 handover may be considered a rare event. In these
   scenarios operators may choose to include the MAP function in ARs
   only. The inclusion of the MAP function in ARs can still be useful to
   reduce the time required to update all correspondent nodes and the
   HA. In this scenario, a mobile node may choose a MAP (in the AR) as
   an anchor point when performing a handoff. This kind of dynamic




Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 17]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   hierarchy (or anchoring) is only recommended for cases where inter-AR
   movement is not frequent.

10. Detection and recovery from MAP failures

   This specification introduces a MAP that can be seen as a local Home
   Agent in a visited network. A MAP, like a Home Agent, is a single
   point of failure. If a MAP fails, its binding cache content will be
   lost, resulting in loss of communication between mobile and
   correspondent nodes. This situation may be avoided with the use of
   more than one MAP on the same link and utilising some form of context
   transfer protocol between them. Alternatively, future versions of the
   Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol [12], or HA redundancy protocols
   may allow networks to recover from MAP failures.

   In cases where such protocols are not supported, the mobile node
   would need to detect MAP failures. The mobile node can detect this
   situation when it receives a router advertisement containing a MAP
   option with a lifetime of zero. The mobile node should start the MAP
   discovery process and attempt to register with another MAP. After it
   has selected and registered with another MAP it will also need to
   inform correspondent nodes and the Home Agent if its RCoA has
   changed. Note that, in the presence of a protocol that transfers
   binding cache entries between MAPs for redundancy purposes, a new MAP
   may be able to provide the same RCoA to the mobile node, e.g. if both
   MAPs advertise the same prefix in the MAP option. This would save the
   mobile node from updating correspondent nodes and the Home Agent.

   Access routers can be triggered to advertise a MAP option with a
   lifetime of zero (indicating MAP failure) in different ways:

    - By manual intervention.
    - In a dynamic manner.

   ARs can perform Dynamic detection of MAP failure by sending ICMP Echo
   request messages to the MAP regularly (e.g. every ten seconds). If no
   response is received an AR may try to aggressively send echo requests
   to the MAP for a short period of time (e.g. once every 5 seconds for
   15 seconds); if no reply is received, a MAP option may be sent with a
   valid lifetime value of zero.

   This specification does not mandate a particular recovery mechanism.
   However, any similar mechanism between the MAP and an AR SHOULD be
   secure to allow for message authentication, integrity protection and
   protection against replay attacks.

11. IANA Considerations

   Section 4 introduces a new flag (M )to the Binding Update specified
   in RFC 3775.
   Section 5 introduces a new IPv6 Neighbour Discovery Option called the



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 18]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   MAP Option. An Option Type value for the MAP Option must be assigned
   by IANA within the option numbering space for IPv6 Neighbour
   Discovery messages.

12. Security considerations

   This specification introduces a new concept to Mobile IPv6, namely, a
   Mobility Anchor Point that acts as a local Home Agent. It is crucial
   that the security relationship between the mobile node and the MAP is
   of strong nature; it MUST involve mutual authentication, integrity
   protection and protection against replay attacks. Confidentiality may
   be needed for payload traffic but is not required for binding updates
   to the MAP. The absence of any of these protections may lead to
   malicious mobile nodes impersonating other legitimate ones,
   impersonating a MAP. Any of these attacks will undoubtedly cause
   undesirable impacts to the mobile node's communication with all
   correspondent nodes having knowledge of the mobile node's RCoA.

   Three different relationships (related to securing binding updates)
   need to be considered:

    1) The mobile node - MAP
    2) The mobile node - Home Agent
    3) The mobile node - correspondent node

12.1. Mobile node-MAP security

   In order to allow a mobile node to use the MAP's forwarding service,
   initial authorization (specifically for the service, not for the
   RCoA) MAY be needed. Authorising a mobile node to use the MAP service
   can be done based on the identity of the mobile node exchanged during
   the SA negotiation process. The authorization may be granted based on
   the mobile node's identity, or based on the identity of a Certificate
   Authority (CA) that the MAP trusts. For instance, if the mobile node
   presents a certificate signed by a trusted entity (e.g. a CA that
   belongs to the same administrative domain, or another trusted roaming
   partner), it would be sufficient for the MAP to authorise the use of
   its service. Note that this level of authorisation is independent of
   authorising the use of a particular RCoA. Similarly, the mobile node
   would trust the MAP, if it presents a certificate signed by the same
   CA, or by another CA that the mobile node is configured to trust
   (e.g. a roaming partner).

   HMIPv6 uses an additional registration between the mobile node and
   its current MAP. As explained in this document, when a mobile node
   moves into a new domain (i.e. served by a new MAP), it obtains an
   RCoA, a LCoA and registers the binding between these two addresses
   with the new MAP. The MAP then verifies whether the RCoA has not been
   registered yet and if so it creates a binding cache entry with the
   RCoA and LCoA. Whenever the mobile node gets a new LCoA, it needs to
   send a new BU that specifies the binding between RCoA and its new



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 19]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   LCoA. This BU needs to be authenticated otherwise any host could send
   a BU for the mobile node's RCoA and hijack the mobile node's packets.
   However since the RCoA is temporary and is not bound to a particular
   node, a mobile node does not have to initially (before the first
   binding update) prove that it owns its RCoA (unlike the requirement
   on home addresses in Mobile IPv6) when it establishes a Security
   Association with its MAP. A MAP only needs to ensure that a BU for a
   particular RCoA was issued by the same mobile node that established
   the Security Association for that RCoA.

   The MAP does not need to have prior knowledge of the identity of the
   mobile node nor its Home Address. As a result the SA between the
   mobile node and the MAP can be established using any key
   establishment protocols such as IKE. A return routability test is not
   necessary.

   The MAP needs to set the SA for the RCoA (not the LCoA). This can be
   performed with IKE [6]. The mobile node uses its LCoA as source
   address but specifies that the RCoA should be used in the SA. This is
   achieved by using the RCoA as the identity in IKE Phase 2
   negotiation. This step is identical to the use of the home address in
   IKE phase 2.

   If a binding cache entry exists for a given RCoA, the MAP's IKE
   policy check MUST point to the SA used to install the entry. If the
   mobile node's credentials stored in the existing SA do not match the
   ones provided in the current negotiation, the MAP MUST reject the new
   SA establishment request for such RCoA with an INVALID-ID-INFORMATION
   notification [6]. This is to prevent two different mobile nodes from
   registering (intentionally or not) the same RCoA. Upon receiving this
   notification, the mobile node SHOULD generate a new RCoA and restart
   the IKE negotiation. Alternatively, a MAP may decide that if a
   binding cache entry already exists for a particular RCoA, no new
   security association should be established for such RCoA,
   independently of the mobile node credentials. This stops the mobile
   node from re-establishing a security association for the same RCoA.
   This is not a major problem since both AH and ESP headers allow for 4
   billion packets to be sent (the size of the sequence number field)
   using the same security association.

   Binding updates between the MAP and the mobile node MUST be protected
   with either AH or ESP in transport mode. When ESP is used, a non-null
   authentication algorithm MUST be used.

12.2. Mobile node-correspondent node security

   Mobile IPv6 [1] defines a return routability procedure that allows
   mobile and correspondent nodes to authenticate binding updates and
   acknowledgements. This specification does not impact the return
   routability test defined in [1]. However, it is important to note
   that mobile node implementers need to be careful when selecting the



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 20]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   source address of the HOTI and COTI messages defined in [1]. The
   source address used in HOTI messages MUST be the mobile node's home
   address. The packet containing the HOTI message is encapsulated
   twice. The inner encapsulating header contains the RCoA in the source
   address field and the home agent's address in the destination address
   field. The outer encapsulating header contains the mobile node's LCoA
   in the source address field and the MAP's address in the destination
   field.

12.3. Mobile node-Home Agent security

   The security relationship between the mobile node and its Home Agent,
   as discussed in [1], is not impacted by this specification.

13. Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to thank Conny Larsson (Ericsson) and Mattias
   Pettersson (Ericsson) for their valuable input to this draft.
   The authors would also like to thank the members of the French RNRT
   MobiSecV6 project (BULL, France Telecom and INRIA) for testing the
   first implementation and for their valuable feedback. The INRIA
   HMIPv6 project is partially funded by the French Government.

   In addition, the authors would like to thank the following members of
   the working group in alphabetical order: Samita Chakrabarti (Sun),
   Gregory Daley (Monash University), Francis Dupont (GET/Enst
   Bretagne), Gopal Dommety (Cisco), Eva Gustaffson (Ericsson), Dave
   Johnson (Rice University), Annika Jonsson (Ericsson), James Kempf
   (Docomo labs), Martti Kuparinen (Ericsson) Fergal Ladley, Gabriel
   Montenegro (Sun), Nick "Sharkey" Moore (Monash University) Erik
   Nordmark (Sun), Basavaraj Patil (Nokia), Brett Pentland (Monash
   University), and Alper Yegin (Samsung) for their comments on the
   draft.

14. Authors' Addresses

   Hesham Soliman
   Flarion Technologies
   email: h.soliman@flarion.com

   Claude Castelluccia
   INRIA Rhone-Alpes
   655 avenue de l'Europe
   38330 Montbonnot Saint-Martin
   France
   email: claude.castelluccia@inria.fr
   phone: +33 4 76 61 52 15


   Karim El Malki
   Ericsson AB



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 21]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   LM Ericssons Vag. 8
   126 25 Stockholm
   Sweden
   email: karim.el-malki@ericsson.com
   phone:  +46 8 7195803

   Ludovic Bellier
   INRIA Rhone-Alpes
   655 avenue de l'Europe
   38330 Montbonnot Saint-Martin
   France
   email: ludovic.bellier@inria.fr
   phone: +33 4 76 61 52 15


15. References

15.1. Normative references

     [1]  D. Johnson, C. Perkins and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in
     IPv6", RFC 3775.

     [2]  S. Thomson and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless Address
     Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462.

     [3]  T. Narten, E. Nordmark and W. Simpson, "Neighbour Discovery
     for IP version 6", RFC 2461.

     [4]  S. Deering and B. Hinden, "Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)
     specification", RFC 2460.

     [5]  D. Harkins and D. Carrel, "The Internet Key Exchange (IKE) ",
     RFC 2409.

     [6]  S. Kent and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication Header", RFC 2402.

     [7]  S. Kent and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating Security Payload",
     RFC 2406.

     [8]  S. Kent and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
     Internet", RFC 2401.

     [9]  A. Conta and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6
     Specification", RFC 2473.

     [10] S. Bradner, "Keywords to use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
     Levels", RFC2119.







Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 22]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004



15.2. Informative References

     [11] K. El Malki (Editor), et. al, "Low latency Handoffs in Mobile
     IPv4", draft-ietf-mobileip-lowlatency-handoffs-v4-08, work in
     progress.

     [12] R. Koodli (Editor), et. al, "Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6",
     draft-ietf-mipshop-fast-mipv6-01.txt, work in progress.

     [13] K. El Malki and H. Soliman, "Simultaneous Bindings for Mobile
     IPv6 Fast Handoffs", draft-elmalki-mobileip-bicasting-v6-03, work
     in progress.

     [14] P. Ferguson and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering:
     Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address
     Spoofing", RFC2267.

     [15] J. Arkko, J. Kempf, B. Sommerfeld, B. Zill and P. Nikander,
     "SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND)", draft-ietf-send-ndopt-04, work
     in progress, February 2004.

































Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 23]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


Appendix A - Fast Mobile IPv6 Handovers and HMIPv6

   Fast Handovers are required to ensure that the layer 3 (Mobile IP)
   handover delay is minimised, thus also minimising and possibly
   eliminating the period of service disruption which normally occurs
   when a mobile node moves between two ARs. This period of service
   disruption usually occurs due to the time required by the mobile node
   to update its HA using Binding Updates after it moves between ARs.
   During this time period the mobile node cannot resume or continue
   communications. The mechanism to achieve Fast Handovers with Mobile
   IPv6 is described in [14] and is briefly summarised here. This
   mechanism allows the anticipation of the layer 3 handover such that
   data traffic can be redirected to the mobile node's new location
   before it moves there.

   While the mobile node is connected to its previous Access Router
   (PAR) and is about to move to a new Access Router (NAR), the Fast
   Handovers in Mobile IPv6 requires in sequence:

   1) the mobile node to obtain a new care-of address at the NAR while
      connected to the PAR
   2) New CoA to be used at NAR case: the mobile node to send a F-BU
      (Fast BU) to its previous anchor point (i.e. PAR) to update its
      binding cache with the mobile node's new CoA while still attached
      to PAR
   3) The previous anchor point (i.e. PAR) to start forwarding packets
      destined for the mobile node to the mobile node's new CoA at NAR
      (or old CoA tunnelled to NAR if new CoA is not applicable).
   4) Old CoA to be used at NAR case: the mobile node to send a F-BU
      (Fast BU) to its previous anchor point (i.e. PAR), after it has
      moved and attached to NAR, in order to update its binding cache
      with the mobile node's new CoA.

   The mobile node or PAR may initiate the Fast Handover procedure by
   using wireless link-layer information or link-layer triggers which
   inform that the mobile node will soon be handed off between two
   wireless access points respectively attached to PAR and NAR. If the
   "trigger" is received at the mobile node, the mobile node will
   initiate the layer-3 handover process by sending a Proxy Router
   Solicitation message to PAR. Instead if the "trigger" is received at
   PAR then it will transmit a Proxy Router Advertisement to the
   appropriate mobile node, without the need for solicitations. The
   basic Fast Handover message exchanges are illustrated in Figure A.1.











Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 24]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


                     +-----------+  1a. HI          +-----+
                     |           | ---------------->| NAR |
                     |    PAR    |  1b. HAck        |     |
                     +-----------+ <--------------- +-----+
                     ^  |        ^
       (2a. RtSolPr) |  | 2b     |
                     |  | Pr     | 3. Fast BU (F-BU)
                     |  | RtAdv  | 4. Fast BA  (F-BACK)
                     |  v        v
                     +------------+
                     |    MN      |
                     +------------+    - - - - - ->
                                       Movement

                    Figure A.1 - Fast Mobile IPv6 Handover Protocol

   The mobile node obtains a new care-of address while connected to PAR
   by means of router advertisements containing information from the NAR
   (Proxy Router Advertisement which may be sent due to a Proxy Router
   Solicitation). The PAR will validate the mobile node's new CoA by
   sending a Handover Initiate (HI) message to the NAR. The new CoA sent
   in the HI message is formed by appending the mobile node's current
   interface identifier to the NAR's prefix. Based on the response
   generated in the Handover Acknowledge (HAck) message, the PAR will
   either generate a tunnel to the mobile node's new CoA (if the address
   was valid) or generate a tunnel to the NAR's address (if the address
   was already in use on the new subnet). If the address was already in
   use on the new subnet it is assumed that there will be no time to
   perform another attempt to configure the mobile node with a CoA on
   the new link, so the NAR will generate a host route for the mobile
   node using its old CoA. Note that message 1a may precede message 2b
   or occur at the same time.

   In [14], the ARs act as local Home Agents, which hold binding caches
   for the mobile nodes and receive Binding Updates. This makes these
   ARs function like the MAP specified in this document. Also, it is
   quite possible that the ARs are not directly connected, but
   communicate through an aggregation router. Such an aggregation router
   is therefore also an ideal position for the MAP functionality. These
   are two ways of integrating the HMIPv6 and Fast Handover mechanisms.
   The first involves placing MAPs in place of the ARs which is a
   natural step. The second scenario involves placing the MAP in an
   aggregation router "above" the ARs. In this case, [14] specifies
   forwarding of packets between PAR and NAR. This could be inefficient
   in terms of delay, bandwidth efficiency since packets will traverse
   the MAP-PAR link twice and packets arriving out of order at the
   mobile node. Using the MAP in the aggregation router would improve
   the efficiency of Fast Handovers which could make use of the MAP to
   redirect traffic, thus saving delay and bandwidth between the
   aggregation router and the PAR.




Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 25]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


                                                 +---------+
                                                 |   MAP   |
                                 +-------------->|         |
                                 |               +---------+
                                 |                 |     ^
                                 |          1a. HI |     |
                                 |                 |     |
                                 |                 |     | 1b. HAck
                                 |                 v     |
                  +---------+    |               +---------+
                  |         |    |               |   NAR   |
                  |   PAR   |    |               |         |
                  +---------+    |               +---------+
                     ^  |        |
       (2a. RtSolPr) |  | 2b     |
                     |  | Pr     | 3. Fast BU (F-BU) from mobile node to
                     |  |             MAP
                     |  | RtAdv  | 4. Fast BA (F-BACK) from MAP to
                     |  |        |    mobile node
                     |  v        v
                    +------------+
                    |     MN     |    Movement
                    +------------+    - - - - - ->

       Figure A.2 Fast Mobile IPv6 Handover Protocol using HMIPv6

   In Figure A.2, the HI/HAck messages now occur between the MAP and NAR
   to check the validity of the newly requested care-of address and to
   establish a temporary tunnel should the new care-of address not be
   valid. Therefore the same functionality of the Fast Handover
   procedure is kept but the anchor point is moved from the PAR to the
   MAP.

   As in the previous Fast Handover procedure, in the network-determined
   case the layer-2 "triggers" at the PAR will cause the PAR to send a
   Proxy Router Advertisement to the mobile node with the MAP option. In
   the mobile-determined case this is preceded by a Proxy Router
   Solicitation from the mobile node. The same layer-2 trigger at PAR in
   the network-determined case could be used to independently initiate
   Context Transfer (e.g. QoS) between PAR and NAR. In the mobile
   determined case the trigger at PAR could be replaced by the reception
   of a Proxy Router Solicitation or F-BU. Context Transfer is being
   worked on in the IETF Seamoby WG.

   The combination of Fast Handover and HMIPv6 allows the anticipation
   of the layer 3 handoff such that data traffic can be efficiently
   redirected to the mobile node's new location before it moves there.
   However it is not easy to determine the correct time to start
   forwarding traffic from the MAP to the mobile node's new location,
   which has an impact on how smooth the handoff will be. The same
   issues arise in [14] with respect to when to start forwarding between



Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 26]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


   PAR and NAR. Packet loss will occur if this is performed too late or
   too early with respect to the time in which the mobile node detaches
   from PAR and attaches to NAR. Such packet loss is likely to occur if
   the MAP updates its binding cache upon receiving the anticipated F-
   BU, since it is not known when exactly the mobile node will perform
   or complete the layer-2 handover to NAR relative to when the mobile
   node transmits the F-BU. Also, some measure is needed to support the
   case in which the mobile node's layer-2 handover unexpectedly fails
   (after Fast Handover has been initiated) or when the mobile node
   moves quickly back-and-forth between ARs (ping-pong). Simultaneous
   bindings [15] provides a solution to these issues. In [15] a new
   Simultaneous Bindings Flag is added to the Fast Binding Update (F-BU)
   message and a new Simultaneous Bindings suboption is defined for Fast
   Binding Acknowledgement (F-BAck) message. Using this enhanced
   mechanism, upon layer-3 handover, traffic for the mobile node will be
   sent from the MAP to both PAR and NAR for a certain period thus
   isolating the mobile node from layer-2 effects such as handover
   timing, ping-pong or handover failure and providing the mobile node
   with uninterrupted layer-3 connectivity.



































Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 27]

INTERNET-DRAFT                   HMIPv6                  December, 2004


Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
   on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in IETF Documents can
   be found in RFC 3667 (BCP 78) and RFC 3668 (BCP 79).

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
   ipr@ietf.org.


Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.


Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.



This Internet-Draft expires June, 2005.









Soliman, et. al                                                [Page 28]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.108, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/