[Mip4] Charter Update Proposal

[Henrik Levkowetz <henrik at levkowetz.com>]

Hi,


Both the list and the WG meeting during IETF-67 indicated support for
adding moving network support and a notification mechanism to the
charter, so below is a proposal for a charter update.  (The resulting
charter, if the updates are accepted, are provided as an attachment.)

We propose to add the following two items to the list of work to
be done:

  11. MIPv4 Moving Network Support

  The Network Mobility (nemo) working group deals with the problem of
  mobility of a whole network, such as might exist inside a vehicle,
  train, or airplane.  The nemo working group has developed draft
  specifications for both IPv6 and IPv4 mobile networks.  However, it has
  been recognized that the IPv4 version of the protocol can be viewed as
  an extension of the basic Mobile IPv4 protocol, and there is good reason
  to do this extension in the mip4 working group.  The working group will
  take on the MIPv4 network mobility internet draft and progress it along
  the standards track.  In addition, the working group will take up
  extensions to the basic MIPv4 moving network support in the areas of
  dynamic prefix assignment and foreign agent support.


  12. Asynchronous Notification Mechanism

  In some situations, there is a need for Mobile IPv4 entities, such as
  the home agent, foreign agent and mobile node to send and receive
  asynchronous notification events during a mobility session.  The base
  Mobile IP Specification [RFC3344] does not have a provision for this. A
  new MIPv4 message pair which would support asynchronous notifications,
  and a notification model describing how to use these messages has been
  proposed.  The working group will take on the existing MIPv4
  notification message draft as a starting point, review and update it as
  needed, and progress it as a standards track document.  In addition, the
  working group will also consider defining specific usages of the
  notification message based on the examples in the current document. 

We also propose to add the following milestones:

   Sep 2007	Base MIPv4 Mobile Network Support (Draft Std.) to IESG
   Nov 2007	MIPv4 Mobile Network Support for FAs (Draft Std.) to IESG
   Nov 2007	MIPv4 Mobile Network Support Dynamic Address Assignment (Draft Std.) to IESG


If you have comments or suggestions relating to the suggested update, please
send them to the list.


Best Regards,

	Henrik and Pete


Mobility for IPv4 (mip4)
------------------------

 Charter
 Last Modified: 2006-07-25

 Current Status: Active Working Group

 Chair(s):
     Henrik Levkowetz  <henrik at levkowetz.com>
     Pete McCann  <mccap at petoni.org>

 Internet Area Director(s):
     Jari Arkko  <jari.arkko at piuha.net>
     Mark Townsley  <townsley at cisco.com>

 Internet Area Advisor:
     Jari Arkko  <jari.arkko at piuha.net>

 Mailing Lists: 
     General Discussion:mip4 at ietf.org
     To Subscribe:      mip4-request at ietf.org
         In Body:       subscribe
     Archive:           http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mip4/index.html

Description of Working Group:

IP mobility support for IPv4 nodes (hosts and routers) is specified in
RFC3344. RFC 3344 mobility allows a node to continue using its
"permanent" home address as it moves around the Internet. The Mobile
IP protocols support transparency above the IP layer, including
maintenance of active TCP connections and UDP port bindings.  Besides
the basic Mobile IPv4 (MIPv4) protocols, several other drafts deal
with concerns such as optimization, security, extensions, AAA support,
and deployment issues.

MIPv4 is currently being deployed on a wide basis (e.g., in cdma2000
networks). The scope of the deployment is on a fairly large scale and
accordingly, the MIP4 WG will focus on deployment issues and on
addressing known deficiencies and shortcomings in the protocol that
have come up as a result of deployment experience. Specifically, the
working group will complete the work items to facilitate interactions
with AAA environments, interactions with enterprise environments when
MIPv4 is used therein, and updating existing protocol specifications
in accordance with deployment needs and advancing those protocols that
are on the standards track.

Work expected to be done by the MIP4 WG as proposed by this charter is
as follows:

1. MIPv4 has been a proposed standard for several years. It has been
adopted by other standard development organizations and has been
deployed commercially. One of the next steps for the WG is to advance
the protocol to draft standard status. As part of advancing base
Mobile IP specs to DS, the MIPv4 NAI RFC (2794) will be revised to
reflect implementation experience.

2. Work items that are pending from the previous Mobile IP WG, which
will be completed by the MIP4 WG, are:

- completion of the MIB for the revised base Mobile IP specification
(2006bis)

- regional registration draft.

3. The MIP4 WG will also complete the work on MIPv4 interactions in
VPN scenarios. This work will involve identifying the requirements and
a solution development for MIPv4 operation in the presence of IPsec
VPNs.

4. Additionally, a proposal has been made for how MOBIKE could work
together with MIPv4. This proposal does not describe any new protocol,
but formulates a best current practice for deploying MOBIKE together
with MIPv4. The working group will adopt and complete this document.

5. Some issues have been raised with respect to RFC3519. These will be
identified and addressed as appropriate, through errata, revision of
RFC 3519, and/or supplemental documents as needed.

6. It has been proposed that the FMIP protocol, which has been
standardised for MIPv6 in the MIPSHOP working group, should also be
published as an experimental protocol for MIPv4. A draft for this
exists. The working group will take up and carry this work forward to
publication

7. An extension to carry generic strings in the Registration Reply
message has been proposed. The purpose is to supply supplemental
human-readable information intended to the MN user. The working group
will complete the specification and applicability statement of such an
extension.

8. RADIUS attributes for MIP4. A set of RADIUS attributes has been
proposed for MIPv4.

The working group will first produce a requirements specification,
describing how the work differs from the requirements in RFC 2977 and
the functionality provided by RFC 4004 (the MIPv4 Diameter App). The
reason why this first step is required is that RFC 3127 shows that
full RFC 2977 functionality can't be provided by even a considerably
extended RADIUS, so we need to match the requirements to what can be
done within RADIUS.

Provided the requirements work finds approval with ADs and RADEXT WG,
the workgroup will complete the specification of MIPv4 RADIUS
attributes, solicit feedback from the RADEXT WG, adjust, and submit
this for publication. Note that the work may require extensions to the
RADIUS attribute space which will be handled outside the MIP4 WG.

9. MIPv4 Extension for Configuration Options.

Several drafts have proposed extensions to help improve configuration
of MIPv4 clients. The latest proposal is for a general configuration
option extension which could carry information such as e.g., DNS
address and DHCP server address. The working group will take on and
complete one proposal for a configuration option extension.

10. Dual-stack Support

There have been several proposals for how to enable an IPv6 connection
over a network that supports Mobile IPv4. A protocol enhancement to
MIPv4 would allow for IPv6 support in a region where Mobile IPv4 has
already been implemented and deployed. This would allow a dual stack
mobile node to maintain IPv6 connectivity when using MIPv4. The
solution would therefore be applicable only to networks that are
not deploying Mobile IPv6.

The working group will take on and complete one proposal for IPv6 over
Mobile IPv4. This work is restricted to a small protocol extension
similar to current Mobile IPv4 functionality. Support for advanced
Mobile IPv6 functionality is strictly outside the scope.

A problem statement covering both Mobile IPv4 and IPv6 dual-stack
issues is expected to come out of MIP6 WG, and will not be developed
in MIP4 WG.


11. MIPv4 Moving Network Support
 
The Network Mobility (nemo) working group deals with the problem of
mobility of a whole network, such as might exist inside a vehicle,
train, or airplane.  The nemo working group has developed draft
specifications for both IPv6 and IPv4 mobile networks.  However, it has
been recognized that the IPv4 version of the protocol can be viewed as
an extension of the basic Mobile IPv4 protocol, and there is good reason
to do this extension in the mip4 working group.  The working group will
take on the MIPv4 network mobility internet draft and progress it along
the standards track.  In addition, the working group will take up
extensions to the basic MIPv4 moving network support in the areas of
dynamic prefix assignment and foreign agent support.


12. Asynchronous Notification Mechanism

In some situations, there is a need for Mobile IPv4 entities, such as
the home agent, foreign agent and mobile node to send and receive
asynchronous notification events during a mobility session.  The base
Mobile IP Specification [RFC3344] does not have a provision for this. A
new MIPv4 message pair which would support asynchronous notifications,
and a notification model describing how to use these messages has been
proposed.  The working group will take on the existing MIPv4
notification message draft as a starting point, review and update it as
needed, and progress it as a standards track document.  In addition, the
working group will also consider defining specific usages of the
notification message based on the examples in the current document. 


Goals and Milestones:

   Done         AAA Keys for MIPv4 to IESG 
   Done         MIPv4 VPN interaction problem statement to IESG 
   Done         Low latency handover to experimental 
   Done         Experimental MIPv4 message and extensions draft to IESG 
   Done         Dynamic Home Agent assignment protocol solution to IESG 
   Done         Revised MIPv4 Challenge/Response (3012bis) to IESG 
   Done         Regional registration document to IESG 
   Jan 2007     MIPv4 Mobike interaction (BCP) to the IESG 
   Feb 2007     MIPv4 Extension for Config. Options (Proposed Std.) to the IESG 
   Dec 2006     MIPv4 VPN interaction (BCP) to the IESG 
   May 2007     RADIUS Extensions for MIPv4 to the RADEXT WG for comment 
   Jan 2007     Revised MIPv4 specification to IESG for Draft Std. 
   Dec 2006     Generic Strings for MIPv4 (Proposed Std.) to the IESG 
   Mar 2007     MIPv4 RADIUS Extensions Requirements to the IESG 
   Dec 2006     FMIPv4 (Experimental) to the IESG 
   Sep 2007     RADIUS Extensions for MIPv4 (Proposed Std.) to the IESG 
   Nov 2007     Revised rfc2794bis (NAI extension) (Draft Std.) to the IESG 
   Aug 2007     Revised MIB for MIPv4 (Proposed Std.) to IESG 
   Apr 2007     Dual-stack MIPv4 (Draft Std.) to IESG 
   Jul 2007	Notification Mechanism (Draft Std.) to IESG
   Sep 2007	Base MIPv4 Mobile Network Support (Draft Std.) to IESG
   Nov 2007	MIPv4 Mobile Network Support for FAs (Draft Std.) to IESG
   Nov 2007	MIPv4 Mobile Network Support Dynamic Address Assignment (Draft Std.) to IESG

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/