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

Versions: 00 01 02

HIP Working Group                                         Gyu Myoung Lee
Internet Draft                                          TELECOM SudParis
Intended status: Informational                             Jun Kyun Choi
Expires: September 2010                                            KAIST
                                                           Seng Kyoun Jo
                                                           Jeong Yun Kim
                                                                    ETRI
                                                             Noel Crespi
                                                        TELECOM SudParis
                                                           March 8, 2010


          Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications
                      draft-lee-object-naming-02.txt


Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

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

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

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

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

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 8, 2010.





Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 1]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010




Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
   Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)
   in effect on the date of publication of this document.  Please
   review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and
   restrictions with respect to this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the BSD License.






































Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 2]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


Abstract

   This document explains the concept of object to object communications
   and describes naming issues for object identification. In order to
   develop protocols for object to object communications, this document
   provides the naming architecture according to mapping relationships
   between host and object(s). In addition, considerations of protocols
   for naming object are specified.

Conventions used in this document

   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.



































Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 3]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010




Table of Contents


   1. Introduction...................................................5
   2. Object to Object Communications................................5
      2.1. Definition of object......................................5
      2.2. Concept of object to object communications................6
      2.3. Various types of objects..................................6
   3. Object Identification..........................................7
      3.1. Classification of network entities to be identified.......7
      3.2. Identification codes......................................8
      3.3. Examples of IDs for objects...............................8
         3.3.1. RFID.................................................8
         3.3.2. Content ID...........................................9
      3.4. Requirements for naming using object identification.......9
   4. Naming Architecture for Objects................................9
      4.1. Layered architecture for identity processing..............9
      4.2. The mapping relationships between host and object(s).....11
         4.2.1. Host = Object (one to one mapping)..................11
         4.2.2. Host =! Object (one to many mapping)................11
      4.3. The stack architecture...................................11
      4.4. Object mapping schemes...................................12
      4.5. Providing connectivity to objects........................15
   5. Considerations of Protocols for Naming Objects................16
      5.1. Security association.....................................16
      5.2. Support of DNS...........................................16
      5.3. Protocol overhead........................................16
      5.4. Common identifier for object.............................16
      5.5. Relationship with locator for mobile object..............16
      5.6. Specific user cases......................................17
      5.7. Services using naming objects............................17
   6. Security Considerations.......................................18
   7. IANA Considerations...........................................18
   8. References....................................................18
      8.1. Normative References.....................................18
      8.2. Informative References...................................18
   Author's Addresses...............................................19










Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 4]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010




1. Introduction

   The one of new capabilities for future network will be the ubiquitous
   networking such as the Internet of things. This networking capability
   should support "Any Time, Any Where, Any Service, Any Network and Any
   Object (so-called "5-Any")" operation. In order to connect objects
   (e.g., devices and/or machines) to large databases and networks, a
   simple, unobtrusive and cost-effective system of item identification
   is crucial. The concept of host should be extended to support all of
   types objects. However, there is no consideration for certain new
   type of objects (e.g., contents, RFID tags, sensors, etc) as end
   points.

   This document describes object to object communications. For
   identification of network entities, we consider new type of
   identifiers (e.g., RFID code, content ID, etc) for objects and
   propose specific requirements for object identification in naming
   point of view.

   For architectural aspect, this document shows architecture for
   identity processing and mapping relationship between several
   identities with conceptual diagram for providing connectivity to
   objects.

   According to several alternative architectures for object naming,
   this document aims to provide requirements and right direction for
   protocol development for realization of object to object
   communications.



2. Object to Object Communications

2.1. Definition of object

   object: a model of an entity. An object is characterized by its
   behavior. An object is distinct from any other object. An object
   interacts with its environment including other objects at its
   interaction points. An object is informally said to perform functions
   and offer services (an object which performs a function available to
   other entities and/or objects is said to offer a service). For
   modeling purposes, these functions and services are specified in
   terms of the behavior of the object and of its interfaces. An object
   can perform more than one function. A function can be performed by
   the cooperation of several objects.


Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 5]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


   NOTE - Objects include terminal devices (e.g. used by a person to
   access the network such as mobile phones, personal computers, etc),
   remote monitoring devices (e.g. cameras, sensors, etc), information
   devices (e.g. content delivery server), products, contents, and
   resources.

   NOTE - the above definition was quoted from ITU-T [Y.2002].

2.2. Concept of object to object communications

   For ubiquitous networking [Y.2002], future network will require the
   extensions of networking functionalities to all objects. New
   networking concept will be considered for networking capabilities to
   support various classes of applications/services which support "Any
   Time, Any Where, Any Service, Any Network and Any Object" operation
   using Internet. This networking capability should support human-to-
   human, human-to-object (e.g., device and/or machine) and object-to-
   object communications.

2.3. Various types of objects

   There are many different kinds of devices connecting to the network
   supported for ubiquitous networking in Internet. RFID tag, sensors,
   smart cards, medical devices, navigation devices, vehicles as well as
   the existing personal devices such as PC, Smartphones are examples of
   these. This document considers that the end points which are not
   always humans but may be objects such as devices /machines, and then
   expanding to small objects and parts of objects.

   The object means that the user or other entity which is connected to
   the network. It includes almost everything around us such as remote
   monitoring and information device/machine/content, etc.

   Figure 1 shows the connection of Internet with the relationship
   between humans and objects in terms of identification and location in
   specifically mobile environments. The types of objects on the end-
   user side include the following: personal devices, information
   devices, RFID/sensors, contents, appliances, vehicles, etc.











Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 6]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


                  Objects
   +--------------------------------------+
   |   +--------------+                  |
   |   | +---------+  | +--------------+  |
   |   | |Personal |  | |  Contents    |  |
   |   | |Devices  |  | |              |  |
   |   | +---------+  | +--------------+  |
   | H |              |                   |  Providing      -------
   | u | +---------+  | +--------------+  | Connectivity   /        \
   | m | |Info.    |  | |  Appliances  |  |               |          |
   | a | |Devices  |  | |              |  |-------------- | Internet |
   | n | +---------+  | +--------------+  |               |          |
   |   |              |                   |               |          |
   |   | +---------+  | +--------------+  |               |          |
   |   | |RFID/    |  | |Transportation|  |               \          /
   |   | |Sensors  |  | |  vehicles    |  |                ---------
   |   | +---------+  | +--------------+  |
   |   +--------------+                   |
   +--------------------------------------+

           Figure 1 Communications with objects through Internet



3. Object Identification

3.1. Classification of network entities to be identified

   There are several network entities to be identified in the network.
   These network entities have a layered architecture and are used for
   naming, addressing and routing.

   o  Services (i.e., information related to applications/services)

   o  End points (i.e., global unique identifier)

   o  Location (i.e., IP address)

   o  Path (i.e., routing)

   In particular, for object to object communications, information for
   several kinds of object on top of end points should be identified in
   the network.






Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 7]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


3.2. Identification codes

   Identification of all objects for providing end-to-end connectivity
   in ubiquitous networking environment is crucial. An identifier is
   capable of identifying all objects and facilitates objects-to-objects
   communications. In particular, a globally unique identifier enables a
   lot of applications including item tracking, access control, and
   protection, etc [1].

   There are many kinds of identifiers such as E.164 numbering plan,
   Extended Unique Identifier (EUI)-64, Media Access Control (MAC)
   address, Uniform Resource Identifier (URI)/ Uniform Resource Locator
   (URL), etc.

   These identification codes can be classified as follows.

   o  Object IDs: include RFID, Content ID, telephone number, URL/URI,
      etc

   o  Communication IDs: include session/protocol ID, IP address, MAC
      address, etc

   In this document basically consider an "Object ID" which generally
   takes the form of an application-specific integer or pointer that
   uniquely identifies an object.

3.3. Examples of IDs for objects

3.3.1. RFID

   The identification codes, so-called Electronic Product Code (EPC),
   for RFID/sensors are very important in ubiquitous networking
   environment. An EPC is simply a number assigned to an RFID tag
   representative of an actual electronic product code. Their value is
   that they have been carefully characterized and categorized to embed
   certain meanings within their structure. Each number is encoded with
   a header, identifying the particular EPC version used for coding the
   entire EPC number. An EPC manager number is defined, allowing
   individual companies or organizations to be uniquely identified; an
   object class number is present, identifying objects used within this
   organization, such as product types. Finally, a serial number is
   characterized, allowing the unique identification of each individual
   object tagged by the organization [2].






Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 8]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


3.3.2. Content ID

   The Content ID is a unique identifier that can specify and
   distinguish any kind of digital content that is distributed. As a
   unique code attached to a content object, the Content ID serves well
   enough as an identifier, but actually it is much more than just that.
   It is also the key to a complete set of attribute information about a
   content object stored as metadata including the nature of the
   contents, rights-related information, information about distribution,
   and more. The Content ID provides the key enabling metadata to be
   uniquely associated with a particular digital object [3].

3.4. Requirements for naming using object identification

   For object to object communications, how to map/bind IP address (i.e.,
   communications IDs) with other identifiers (i.e., object IDs) for
   providing end-to-end IP connectivity is challenging issue.

   Additionally, the following features should be provided using naming
   capability through object identification.

   o  Scalability with enough name space to support new devices/machines
      enabling communications

   o  Protection of object (including right management) using security
      function

   o  Connecting to anything for providing the connectivity to end
      device without additional equipment such as Network Address
      Translator using object identification

   o  Service and location discovery through performing two functions;
      Routing using network prefix information and identification code
      using object IDs



4. Naming Architecture for Objects

4.1. Layered architecture for identity processing

   As shown in Figure 2, the layered architecture of identity processing
   requires  specific  processing  capabilities  at  each  layer.  Each
   user/object in applications identifies by identity like name with a
   set of attributes of an entity. An attribute can be thought of as
   metadata that belongs to a specific entity in a specific context,
   some of which could to be highly private or sensitive. The identity


Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010                [Page 9]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


   should be associated with object IDs through identification and
   authorization.  Each  object  ID  also  should  be  associated  with
   communication IDs through mapping/binding [Y.ipv6-ID].



    Identity Processing
                                                Identifiers

      ------------                          +------------------+
     + User Name   +                        |Logical identities |
    + (Attributes)  +                       |    for services   |
     +             +                        |                   |
      ------------                          +-------------------+
           ^                                           |
           |      +----------------+                   |
     ----- |----- |Identification/ |------------------ |-----------
           |      |Authorization   |                   |
           |     +----------------+                    |
           |                                           |
           |                                           |
       -------------                         +------------------+
      + Object IDs   +                      | RFID,Content ID,  |
     + (Physical &    +                     |Telephone number,  |
      + logical IDs) +                      | URL/URI, etc      |
       -------------                         +------------------+
           ^                                           |
           |      +---------------+                    |
     ----- |----- |    Mapping/   |------------------- |-----------
           |      |    Binding    |                    |
           |     +---------------+                     |
           |                                  +---------------------+
           |                                  | Session/Protocol ID |
           |                                  +---------------------+
           |                                             |
           |                                   +---------------------+
     --------------                          |     IP address       |
    + Communication +                         +---------------------+
   +      IDs        +                                  |
     +               +                        +---------------------+
      --------------                          |     MAC address     |
                                              +---------------------+


           Figure 2 Layered architecture for identity processing






Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 10]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


4.2. The mapping relationships between host and object(s)

   In this document, host means a device that communicates using the
   Internet protocols (i.e., IP addresses).

4.2.1. Host = Object (one to one mapping)

   In case of a host is equal to an object, there is one to one mapping
   relationship between host and object. Most of information devices
   such as PC, etc are included in this case.

   Current HIP has been typically designed for this case.

4.2.2. Host =! Object (one to many mapping)

   In case of a host is not equal to an object, there is one to many
   mapping relationship between host and object(s). Content server, RFID
   tags/Reader, etc are included in this case.

   There are two kinds of one to many mapping as follows (see Figure 3):

   o  As shown in Figure 3 (a), host including objects such as content
      server, a host includes many objects and these objects should be
      identified using content ID, etc.

   o  As shown in Figure 3 (b), host with remote objects such as RFID
      tags, a host has many remote objects and these objects should be
      identified using RFID code, etc. In this case, each object might
      be non IP.



4.3. The stack architecture

   The original stack architecture of HIP can be extended according to
   the mapping relationships between host and object(s).

   o  As shown in Figure 4 (a), objects in a host (case #1), the end
      point is the same with current HIP architecture. However, each
      object in service layer should be identified by a host using
      mapping protocol for object.

   o  As shown in Figure 4 (b), remote objects (case #2), the end point
      will be each object. This means that host location is different
      from end point(s). Thus, current HIP should be extended to support
      several end points with a host. From object information in service
      layer, each object identity should be defined.


Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 11]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010




4.4. Object mapping schemes

   There are two kinds of object mapping schemes using one to many
   mapping relationship as follows:

   o  Direct mapping (Figure 4 (a))

      An object at application layer is directly reachable to host
      entity at network attachment point which IP is terminated. An
      object is located on top of TCP/IP protocol stack. For example,
      host including objects such as content server, a host includes
      many objects and these objects should be identified using content
      ID, etc.

   o  Indirect mapping (Figure 4 (b))

      An object at application layer is remotely reachable through non-
      IP interface to host entity at network attachment point which IP
      is terminated. An object is located outside of physical network
      attachment which IP is terminated. For example, host with remote
      objects such as RFID tags, a host has many remote objects and
      these objects should be identified using RFID code, etc. In this
      case, each object might be non IP.
























Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 12]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010




                       +--------------------------+
                       |                          |
                       |        +--------+        |
                       |        | Object |        |
                       |        +--------+        |
                       |                          |
                       |        +--------+        |
                       |        | Object |        |
                       |        +--------+        |
                       |            .             |
                       |            .             |
                       |            .             |
                       |                          |
                       |        +--------+        |
                       |        | Object |        |
                       |        +--------+        |
                       |                          |
                       |           Host           |
                       |                          |
                       +--------------------------+

             (a) Host including objects(e.g., content server)

                                              +-------+
                            -----------------| Object |
                            /                 +--------+
                           /                      .
                          /                       .
                  +------+                    +--------+
                  | Host | ------------------ | Object |
                  +------+                    +--------+
                          \                       .
                           \                      .
                            \                 +--------+
                             ----------------| Object |
                                              +-------+
                                            Remote objects
                                               (non IP)

           (b) Host with remote objects(e.g., RFID tags/Reader)

    Figure 3 Mapping between host (IP address) and objects (object IDs)
                           (one to many mapping)




Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 13]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


                       Host (e.g., content server)
                     +----------------------------+
                      |      +----+                |
                      |      |    | Object IDs     |
                      |      +----+                |
                      |        |                   |
                      |      +----+                |
                      |      |    | IP address     |
                      |      +----+                |
                      |        |                   |
                      |      +----+                |
                      |      |    | Network        |
                      |      +----+ attachment     |
                      +----------------------------+
        IP interface           |
        -----------------------+
        (a) Case #1: Objects in a host (host location = end points)


                                                       Object IDs
                                                          +----+
                                                          |    |
                       Host (e.g., RFID reader)           +----+
                       +---------------------------+         |
                      |                            |         |
                      |      +----+                |         |
                      |      |    | IP address     |         |
                      |      +----+                |         |
                      |        |                   |         |
                      |      +----+                |         |
                      |      |    | Network        |         |
                      |      +----+ attachment     |         |
                       +---------------------------+         |
        IP interface         |     |     non-IP interface    |
        ---------------------+     +-------------------------+

         (b) Case #2: Remote objects (host location =! end points)

                 Figure 4 Extension of stack architecture










Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 14]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


4.5. Providing connectivity to objects

   For providing connectivity to objects using object identification,
   the Figure 5 shows object mapping/ binding with IP address for IP
   connectivity to all objects in end-user side. This scheme can provide
   the  global  connectivity  with  Internet  to  objects  through  the
   association (e.g., mapping/binding) between identifier for object and
   IP address.

  Host                 Object
 +-------------------- /--------------+
 |     -------------- /--             |
 |    /          --- /   \        +==+|              |  -------------
 |   |          +   +  -----------|   |              | +              +
 |   |  ---      ---     |        |   |IP address    | +              +
 |   | +   + ------------|--------|   |----          | +              +
 |   |  ---   ---        |        |   |    \         | +              +
 |   |       +   +  --------------|   |     \        | +              +
 |    \       ---        /        +==+|      \       | +              +
 |     -----------------              |       \      | +              +
  +------------------------------------+        ------ +              +
                                                     | +              +
                   Object                              +   Internet   +
                     /                             -- +               +
      ------------- /-                            /  | +              +
     /         --- /   \                         /   | +              +
    |         +   + -------                    /     | +              +
    |  ---     ---     |     \+-------+       /      | +              +
    | +   + -----------------| \      |     /        | +              +
    |  ---             |      |\ \ +==+|   /         | +              +
    |          ---     |    * | \ \|   |--           | +              +
    |         +   + --------*-|----|   | IP address  | +              +
    |          ---     |******|   /|   |             | +              +
    |  ---             |    *    / +==+|             | +              +
    | +   + ---------------*-|--       |             |  --------------
    |  ---             |    * +--------+             |
    \                 /     *   Gateway        IP interface
      ---------------       *
                          non-IP
                         interface

   +-----------+   Mapping   +-----------+         -------------
   +Identifier  + --------  +    IP      + ==== /    Global     \
   +for object  +  Binding   +  Address   +     | Connectivity  |
   +-----------+             +-----------+       \ with Internet/
                                                  -------------
     Figure 5 Conceptual diagram for providing connectivity to objects


Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 15]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


5. Considerations of Protocols for Naming Objects

5.1. Security association

   It is critical to provide security association for secure binding
   between object identity and IP address similar with HIP [5].



5.2. Support of DNS

   An ID resolution server such as Domain Name System (DNS), can provide
   a function to translate the identifier of object into service
   /communication ID to access networking services provided by
   database/application servers.

   In order to support from existing infrastructure, including DNS, it
   is required to define DNS resource records. The newly defined DNS
   resource records should include information on object IDs.



5.3. Protocol overhead

   Real time communications and some limitation of power and packet size,
   lightweight identity handshake for datagram transactions is critical.



5.4. Common identifier for object

   Most of identifiers for object specified with different format
   according to applications. However, in order to contain information
   of all objects in protocol message and interoperate globally, it is
   required to specify common identifier and rules to accommodate all
   objects with unified format.



5.5. Relationship with locator for mobile object

   As the location of object(s) is frequently changed in mobile
   environment, the information of object ID should be resolved with the
   information of location. It is required to use the concept of
   ID/Locator separation considering object ID.




Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 16]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


5.6. Specific user cases

   Naming protocol for object can use original advantages of HIP for
   specific user cases.

   o  Identity-based roaming and mobility

   o  Hierarchical routing

   o  Addressing and location management

   o  Multi-homing

   o  Rendezvous service (or mechanism)

   o  DNS service



5.7. Services using naming objects

   The proposed naming objects can provide an integrated solution for
   personal location and management through identification /naming
   /addressing including ID registration, location tracking, dynamic
   mobility control, and security using the following networking
   services:

   o  Identity management (IdM) services for the management of the
      identity life cycle of objects including managing unique IDs,
      attributes, credentials, entitlements to consistently enforce
      business and security policies.

   o  Location management services for real-time location tracking,
      monitoring, and information processing of moving objects similar
      with Supply Chain Management.

   o  Networked ID (N-ID) services for providing communication service
      which is triggered by an identification process started via
      reading an identifier from identifier storage such as RFID tag,
      barcode label, smartcard, etc.

   o  Home networking services for the management of multiple object
      identities in a host and/or remote host using RFID tag, ubiquitous
      sensor, etc.





Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 17]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


6. Security Considerations

   This document has specific security considerations as described in
   Section 5 and aligns with the security requirements in [RFC4423] and
   [RFC5201].



7. IANA Considerations

   This document has no actions for IANA.



8. References

8.1. Normative References

   None

8.2. Informative References

   [RFC4423] R. Moskowitz, P. Nikander, "Host Identity Protocol (HIP)
             Architecture", RFC 4423, May 2006.

   [RFC5201] R. Moskowitz, P. Nikander, P. Jokela, T. Henderson, "Host
             Identity Protocol", RFC 5201, April 2008.

   [Y.2002]  ITU-T Y.2002, "Overview of ubiquitous networking and of its
             support in NGN", November 2009.

   [Y.IPv6-object]ITU-T TD43 (WP5/13), "Framework of Object Mapping
             using IPv6 in NGN", work in progress, September 2009.

   [1]   Gyu Myoung Lee, Jun Kyun Choi, Taesoo Chung, Doug Montgomery,
         "Standardization for ubiquitous networking in IPv6-based NGN",
         ITU-T Kaleidoscope Event - Innovations in NGN, pp.351-357, May
         2008.

   [2]   EPCglobal, "EPCglobal Object Name Service (ONS) 1.0.1", May
         2008.

   [3]   Content ID Forum (cIDf), "cIDf Specification 2.0", April 2007.

   [4]   IETF HIP-RG mailing group discussion, available at
         https://listserv.cybertrust.com/pipermail/hipsec-rg/2008-
         December/000545.html.


Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 18]


     Naming Architecture for Object to Object Communications   March 2010


   [5]   Heer, Varjonen, "HIP Certificates," IETF Internet-Draft, draft-
         ietf-hip-cert-02.txt, work in progress, October 2009.



Author's Addresses

   Gyu Myoung Lee
   Institut TELECOM, TELECOM SudParis
   9 rue Charles Fourier, 91011, Evry, France

   Phone: +33 (0)1 60 76 41 19
   Email: gmlee@it-sudparis.eu


   Jun Kyun Choi
   Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)
   119 Munjiro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-732, KOREA

   Phone: +82-42-350-6122
   Email: jkchoi@ee.kaist.ac.kr


   Seng Kyoun Jo
   Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)
   138 Gajeongno, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-700, KOREA

   Phone: +82-42-860-6461
   Email: skjo@etri.re.kr


   Jeong Yun Kim
   Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)
   138 Gajeongno, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-700, KOREA

   Phone: +82-42-860-5311
   Email: jykim@etri.re.kr

   Noel Crespi
   Institut TELECOM, TELECOM SudParis
   9 rue Charles Fourier, 91011, Evry, France

   Phone: +33 (0)1 60 76 46 23
   Email: noel.crespi@it-sudparis.eu





Lee, et al.           Expires September 8, 2010               [Page 19]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/