NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 44th IETF Meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It may now be out-of-date. Last Modified: 25-Jan-99
Erik Nordmark <email@example.com>
Jim Solomon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Routing Area Director(s):
Rob Coltun <email@example.com>
Routing Area Advisor:
Rob Coltun <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To Subscribe: email@example.com
In Body: subscribe mobile-ip
Description of Working Group:
The Mobile IP Working Group is chartered to develop or adopt architectures and protocols to support mobility within the Internet. In the near-term, protocols for supporting transparent host ``roaming'' among different subnetworks and different media (e.g., LANs, dial-up links, and wireless communication channels) shall be developed and entered into the Internet standards track. The work is expected to consist mainly of new and/or revised protocols at the (inter)network layer, but may also include proposed modifications to higher-layer protocols (e.g., transport or directory). However, it shall be a requirement that the proposed solutions allow mobile hosts to interoperate with existing Internet systems.
In the longer term, the group may address, to the extent not covered by the mobile host solutions, other types of internet mobility, such as mobile subnets (e.g., a local network within a vehicle), or mobile clusters of subnets (e.g., a collection of hosts, routers, and subnets within a large vehicle, like a ship or spacecraft, or a collection of wireless, mobile routers that provide a dynamically changing internet topology).
Goals and Milestones:
Review and approve the charter, making any changes deemed necessary.
Post an Internet-Draft documenting the Mobile Hosts protocol.
Review the charter of the Mobile IP Working Group for additional work required to facilitate non-host mobility.
Submit the IPv4 Mobile Host Protocol to the IESG as a Proposed Standard.
Submit the IPv6 Mobile Host Protocol to the IESG as a Proposed Standard.
Review the WG charter and update as needed.
Request For Comments:
IP in IP Tunneling
Applicability Statement for IP Mobility Support
Minimal Encapsulation within IP
IP Encapsulation within IP
IP Mobility Support
The Definitions of Managed Objects for IP Mobility Support using SMIv2
Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP
Sun's SKIP Firewall Traversal for Mobile IP
Minutes of the Mobile IP WG
Reported by Basavaraj Patil.
IETF 44 at Minneapolis, MN
Tuesday March 16, 1999 9 AM - 11:30 AM
Co-Chairs : Erik Nordmark and Jim Solomon
MIP testing event for IPv6 implementations:
June 99 or Sept 99
The event is in Grenoble, France (in the Alps).
- Jim Solomon is retiring as the co-chair. Basavaraj Patil of Nortel Networks is taking on the responsibility of the co-chair of this WG.
- New mailing list to be moved to a Nortel site. Details will be announced this week on the mailing list. This takes effect on Monday, 22nd. The new mailing address for e-mail discussion is firstname.lastname@example.org
Mobile IPv6 status (5 minutes)
Dave Johnsson - draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-07.txt
- The document is almost completed. A few comments from IESG have been received. The details are on the slides.
- There are two implementations of M-IPV6 that use IPSec.
- The document has been sent to the IESG and is being reviewed by the ADs. The references need to be updated and submitted to IANA.
- The R bit to the binding update to home agent needs to be added or put a zero for the time being. Consensus to add the R bit.
- Need a WG last call on the draft once that is done.
Enhancements to Dynamic Home Agent Discovery (10 minutes)
Andrew Shen - draft-shen-mobileip-ipv6-ha-discov-00.txt
- Adding the new Global IP address which is an additional 24 bytes has no advantage. The information is already included in the original header.
- Maximum number of users assigned to an HA is not a protocol issue. Hence there are no interoperability issues that exist that this draft solves.
Requirements and Architecture
Requirements on Mobile IP from a Cellular Perspective (10 minutes)
Eva Gustafsson - draft-ietf-mobileip-cellular-requirements-00.txt
- First version of this draft. It is work in progress.
- The name of the draft gives the status misleading. Suggestion by C. Perkins to have drafts be associated with M-IP rather than individual names. However, the co-chairs had agreed to publish the draft as draft-ietf-mobileip
- The Access Network in a cellular environment should be viewed as just an access network and not necessarily have anything to do with M-IP.
- TIPHON is looking at similar issues and proposes an interworking/liason with this WG to identify and deal with them.
- Compatibility with GTP needs to be changed to interworking.
IP Mobility Architecture Framework (10 minutes)
Carey Becker email@example.com - draft-ietf-mobileip-ipm-arch-00.txt
- Seamless roaming between heterogeneous wireless networks using Mobile IP as the mobility protocol in the core network is a difficult solution.
- Triangle routing in IPV4 may be unavoidable because current systems are not capable of supporting the concepts proposed by Route Optimization.
- C. Perkins and D. Johnson agree that route optimization can be supported in today's Internet.
- Question about the + associated with AAA. This is the mobility part in this architecture.
- Suggestion about passing QOS type of information in the binding update message.
3G Wireless Data Provider Architecture Using Mobile IP and AA (10 minutes)
"Tom Hiller" firstname.lastname@example.org - draft-hiller-3gwireless-00.txt
- Overview of discussions held in the TIA.
- Header compression proposals made recently need to be considered - RFC 2507.
- Link layer authentication is done by the cellular network using IMSI, HLR and VLR.
- PPP may not be the right link layer protocol. HDLC framing may be a better option.
- Cisco has some patents on L2TP. This may be an issue if L2TP is considered as the tunneling mechanism between the Radio Access Network and the location of the FA in the network.
Route Optimization in Mobile IP
"Charles Perkins" Charles.Perkins@Eng.Sun.Com - draft-ietf-mobileip-optim-08.txt
- This draft is being reissued as a result of some contributions from Nortel Networks to the binding update process.
- C. Perkins is proposing the creation of a terminology document. All documents need to have a section clarifying the terminology used in the document rather than creating another document.
- Sun may host interoperability testing for mobile IP and Diameter in the next couple of months.
- Drafts discussed are NAI Extension, FA Challenge response, Private Addresses.
- DHCP can allocate the IP address for the MN. There is no reason for having the AAA server allocate the address for the MN. Also the address may be assigned by the visiting network.
- Issues exist with private addressing. This is an item that raises some concerns.
NAI Resolution for Wireless Networks (10 minutes)
"Lachu Aravamudhan" email@example.com - draft-ietf-mobileip-nai-wn-00.txt
- Should the AAA servers in the visiting network have the capability to resolve the mobile identifiers into the home domain of the MN?
- The MN has a subscription with the with the cellular provider and another one with the data network. Hence you may not need this mapping.
IP micro-mobility support using HAWAII (10 minutes)
"Ram Ramjee" firstname.lastname@example.org - draft-ramjee-micro-mobility-hawaii-00.txt
- In the case of M-IP with route optimization and use of co-located COAs there is no involvement of any agents in the routing. Hence there is no reliability issue that HAWAII solves specifically.
- If there are multiple paths from the root router to the lower level routers how are updates handled.
- Assumption is that the base stations in the network have IP connectivity.
Mobile IP Authentication (10 minutes)
"Stuart Jacobs" email@example.com - Unpublished update to draft-jacobs-mobileip-pki-auth-00.txt
- Cellular systems do not have a problem with distributing shared secrets to millions of mobile nodes. Scaling was mentioned as an issue associated with distribution of shared secrets to mobile nodes.
Transparent Hierarchical Mobility Agents (THEMA) (10 minutes)
"Pete McCann" firstname.lastname@example.org - draft-mccann-thema-00.txt
- If the SA fails what is the mechanism for re-establishing the tunnel.
- Security issues may exist.
- Garbage collection of these GRE tunnels is done using lifetimes associated with these tunnels.
- GRE tunnels are required in the foreign network but not necessarily in the home network.
Discussion of rechartering the WG activities:
- List of what needs to be the focus of this WG at this stage and what are some of the items that need to be worked on.
Problems to solve in the Mobile IP domain:
1. Apply AAA to mobile IP.
2. QOS - diff-serv or RSVP
3. Micro vs. Macro Mobility
4. IPv4 Private Address spaces. What scenarios?
5. Apply everything to IPv4 and IPv6.
6. Location privacy?
7. Trust model.
Suggestions from the WG participants:
- Guidelines for transitioning the IPv4 networks to IPv6.
- Private addresses are more difficult scenarios and hence need to be of a lower priority.
- Cellular requirements drafts.
- What is the timeline for discussion of these work items?
- Support for using NAI. Will be sent for last call soon.
- Announcement to hold an interop testing event by Sun end of July. Details to be posted to the mailing list.
AAA extensions and Route Optimization
PROPOSALS for DYNAMIC HOME AGENT DISCOVERY In Mobile IPv6
IP Mobility Architecture Framework
HAWAII: A Domain- Based Approach for Supporting Mobility in Cellular Networks
Mobile IPv6 Status
Mobile IP Public Key Based Authentication
NAI Resolution for Wireless NAI Resolution for Wireless Networks
Enhancements to the Route Optimization draft
Transparent Hierarchical Mobility Agents