[802SEC] FW: [New-work] WG Review: Network-based Localized Mobility Management(netlmm)
- To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
- Subject: [802SEC] FW: [New-work] WG Review: Network-based Localized Mobility Management(netlmm)
- From: "Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)" <paul.congdon@HP.COM>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 06:41:16 -0800
- Reply-To: "Congdon, Paul T (ProCurve)" <paul.congdon@HP.COM>
- Thread-Index: AcYGPC9QXLrzboIqR9qty6opqeNyQQAAFBXw
- Thread-Topic: [New-work] WG Review: Network-based Localized Mobility Management(netlmm)
The following announcement from the IETF may be of interest to your WG
members. Please forward along at your discretion.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On
Behalf Of The IESG
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:34 AM
Subject: [New-work] WG Review: Network-based Localized Mobility
A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Internet Area. The
IESG has not made any determination as yet. The following draft charter
was submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only. Please
send your comments to the IESG mailing list (email@example.com) by December
Network-based Localized Mobility Management (netlmm)
Current Status: Proposed Working Group
Internet Area Director(s):
Mark Townsley <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Margaret Wasserman <email@example.com>
Internet Area Advisor:
Margaret Wasserman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
https://vesuvio.ipv6.cselt.it/mailman/listinfo/netlmm to subscribe
There is considerable evidence that mobility for IP nodes can be more
efficiently handled if mobility management is broken down into localized
mobility management and global mobility management. Local mobility
involves movements across some administratively and geographically
contiguous set of subnets, while global mobility involves movements
across broader administrative, geographical, and topological domains.
Previous work in the IETF has focused on supporting localized mobility
management for a Mobile IPv6 node, and the protocols developed have
required mobile node-side support at the IP layer.
Recently in the IETF, new work on global mobility management approaches
other than Mobile IPv6 suggests that a localized mobility management
approach decoupled from the global mobility management protocol might
result in a more modular mobility management system design and therefore
more longevity and an easier evolution path. In the WLAN infrastructure
market, WLAN switches, which perform localized mobility management
without any mobile node involvement , have seen widespread deployment,
indicating the technical feasibility and positive user acceptance of
this approach. This suggests a design paradigm that could be used to
accommodate global mobility management protocols of different types
while not increasing software complexity: a network-based, localized
mobility protocol with no mobile node software to specifically implement
localized mobility management and no requirement for a network interface
to change IP address when the mobile node changes to a new router. The
task of the NETLMM Working Group is to design a protocol solution for
network-based localized mobility management.
The network-based localized mobility management protocol will conform to
the following framework. Mobility anchor points within the backbone
network maintain a collection of routes for individual mobile nodes.
The routes point to the access routers on which mobile nodes currently
are located. Packets for the mobile node are routed to and from the
mobile node through the mobility anchor point. When a mobile node moves
from one access router to another, the access routers send a route
update to the mobility anchor point. While some mobile node involvement
is necessary and expected for generic mobility functions such as
movement detection and to inform the access router about mobile node
movement, no specific mobile node to network protocol will be required
for localized mobility management itself. The working group will develop
a protocol between the access routers and mobility anchor points that
minimally has the following functions:
- Handles a new mobile node that powers on or moves from another
localized mobility management domain, or an existing mobile node that
shuts down without any notice (i.e. crashes), - Handles routing update
when a mobile node moves from one access router to another within the
localized mobility management domain,The necessity for additional
protocol functions may arise during Working Group discussions, so this
list should not be taken as final.
The protocol will be independent of any particular global mobility
management protocol, and it will be link-layer agnostic by running on
top of IP.
The protocol itself will be agnostic with respect to the last hop link
layer protocol between the mobile node and the access router.
Adaptation of the protocol to different kinds of last hop link layers is
accomplished through an interface on the access router common to all
link layers under which specific link layer mechanisms (possibly
together with authentication mechanisms) can provide a reliable handover
indication and unique identity for the mobile node. This will enable the
access router to do a route update using NETLMM on behalf of the mobile
node. In addition to the NETLMM protocol document, the Working Group
will produce an informational document that describes how existing and
developing IETF standards for node to access router communication on the
local link can be used to accomplish secure triggering of route update.
This document will be informational only, because some link protocols
are expected to provide their own mechanisms. The scope of the work is
initially limited to IPv6 both in the backbone and on the edges, and is
primarily for networks covering larger geographical regions such as
multiple corporate campuses and metropolitian areas. The protocol will
not attempt to hide handover between two separate interfaces on the
The protocol will not define a new tunneling protocol but will reuse
existing IP tunneling mechanisms if necessary. The NETLMM protocol will
maintain compatibility with other IETF standards, both existing and
developing, such as DNS, DNA, and global mobility protocols such as
Mobile IPv6 and NEMO Basic Support.
Security between access routers and the mobility anchor will be defined
for the protocol based on an IETF-approved threat model giving
preference to existing security solutions where applicable. The threat
model will be described in a document delivered sufficiently in advance
of completion of the protocol design that the protocol design can
accommodate mitigation measures. In addition, the mobile node to router
interfacea document will describe threats to the protocol when the
default, IP-level mobile nodea to router protocol is used, and will
prescribe how existing security protocols are useda to counter the
threats. The Working Group has the following deliverables:
- A problem statement document that clearly and succinctly describes the
problem posed by localized mobility management and why a network-based
approach is desirable,
- A requirements and gap analysis that examines a selection of existing
IETF protocols, particularly within the mobility space, for
applicability as a solution. If a proposed protocol is insufficient as a
solution, the reasons why will be clearly stated.
- A threat model draft that describes the threats to a netlmm protocol,
based on the framework described in this charter, and how the threats
can be mitigated giving preference to existing security solutions where
- A protocol design for an interoperable, scalable network-based
localized mobility management protocol between the access routers and
the mobility anchor point including security for the access router to
mobility anchor interface,
- A document describing how existing or developing IETF protocol
standards can be used between the access router and the mobile node to
inform the access router about the arrival of a mobile node, for use
when the wireless link protocol does not provide support for this
function. This document will also discuss threats and security
countermeasures for mobile node identification.
Out of scope for the first design are: route optimization, inter-access
router tunneling to optimize handover, mechanisms for handover between
localized mobility management domains (other than standard global
mobility management protocols), IPv4 support, and multiple mobility
anchor points. During the design process, these enhancements will be
kept in mind, but actual work to incorporate them or other enhancements
will be deferred until after the initial design is complete and the
working group recharters.
Jan. 2006 - Charter Working Group.
March. 2006 - Working Group Last Call on Problem Statement and
First draft of NETLMM threat model document.
March 2006 - IETF 65, Discuss Last Call comments on Problem Statement
and Requirements documents.
Discuss NETLMM Threat Model document.
April 2006 - Submit Problem Statement and Requirements documents to IESG
for publication as Informational RFCs.
June 2006 - Working Group Last Call on Threat Model documents. Submit
Threat Model document to SAAG for review.
July 2006 - Working Group Last Call on Threat Model document
Aug. 2006 - IETF 66, Discuss Last Call comments on Threat Model
Sept. 2006 - Submit Threat Model document to IESG for publication as an
Oct. 2006 - Working Group Last Call on Protocol draft. Working Group
Last Call on Mobile Node to Access Router document.
Nov. 2006 - IETF 67, Discuss last call comments on Protocol document and
Mobile Node to Access Router document.
Dec. 2006 - Submit Protocol draft to IESG for publication as Proposed
Standard and Mobile Node to Access Router document for publication as
Jan. 2007 - Recharter to address enhancements.
New-work mailing list
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.