Network-Based Mobility Extensions WG meeting at IETF81 (Quebec, CA) THURSDAY, July 28, 2011 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I Chairs: Basavaraj Patil (basavaraj.patil@nokia.com) Rajeev Koodli (rkoodli@cisco.com) These meeting minutes are courtesy of: 1. Charles Perkins (charles.perkins@earthlink.net) 2. Dirk Von-Hugo (Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de) ------------------------------------------------------------ Chairs announce slight change to (latest) published agenda: PMIPv6 inter-working with WiFi access authentication(I-D: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-liebsch-netext-pmip6-authiwk-02.txt) has been dropped from the agenda for todays meeting. Logistics (Bluesheets, minutes takers: Charlie and Dirk, jabber: Behcet, agenda bashing) 2. WG Status update Chairs 5 Mins = ietf-netext-redirect-08 sent back for IPR issues related sections (5.4) were deleted. = ietf-netext-bulk-re-registration-04 WC LC completed; significant changes made. Need reviews. Carlos Bernardos volunteering to review. Marco Liebsch volunteering. = ietf-netext-pmip-lr-04 WC LC completed; a few reviews received. Chair review done. Revised I-D needed. = ietf-netext-radius-pmip6-03 WC LC completed; radius draft reviewed by radius expert Pete McCann - he is happy with it. Only comment on collapse of ... (signalling?). Chair review submitted. New revision awaited prior to forwarding the I-D to IESG = ietf-netext-logical-interface-support-02 Logical Interface: - set of issues have been identified, discussed at IETF 80 - Editor has proposed text. - WG consensus needed, followed by revision ............................................... 3. Open discussion of (remaining) issues related to logical interface support for multi-mode IP hosts 20 Mins We have had discussion on the set of issues that have been identified and captured in the tracker (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/netext/trac/report/1) at IETF80. Authors have proposed text to resolve these issues. We need to close the issues and move forward. So we will seek consensus at the meeting and on the list in order to make progress. I-D: draft-ietf-netext-logical-interface-support-02 ............................................... 4. PMIP6 extensions for flow mobility 20 Mins This work item is stuck in a quagmire and has not made forward progress. There is no value in rehashing the same discussion as IETF80. We will seek consensus for adoption of this I-D as WG document while recognizing that there are issues and concerns which need to be resolved. We will use the issue tracker to capture the issues and resolve them through the WG process. But we can do this only after we have a baseline document which is a WG adopted I-D. I-D: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 URL: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03.txt = Proposal for making progress on flow mobility - draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03 - there are concerns with that proposal - in order to make progress, recommend adopting it anyway Question to the attendees at the meeting: "Should we adopt I-D: draft-bernardos-netext-pmipv6-flowmob-03.txt as the starting point of the WG document?" - strong consensus in room to adopt (18 to zero) ............................................... 5. Prefix Delegation for Proxy Mobile IPv6 10 Mins I-D: draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01 URL: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-zhou-netext-pd-pmip-01.txt Presenter: Carl Williams Problem: = Gap between NEMO and DHCPv6-PD (RFC 6276) in PMIPv6 = In PMIPv6, prefix for MN is hosted on the access link -- not a delegated prefix = For MR, need delegation (not specified). = Prefix not properly "advertised" -- LMA could fail to forward. = Carlos: Wants a bit more general solution to allow for MR <--> MAG as well as mobile MAG = Carl: looking at more limited problem with iPhone (e.g., tethering) = Also 3GPP Rel-10 (TS 29.061) uses approach in RFC 6276 = Key point: delegated prefix(es) need to be associated with PMIPv6 binding and forwarding state = Jari: struggling to understand the difference from other problems - With existing solutions, routers on path already have to know how to forward packets to delegated prefix == Behcet: problem is we do not have a PMIP "NEMO" == Jari rephrasing Jonne: in PMIP actually have a distributed router so LMA has to be explicitly told == Rajeev: MAG could have a /48, and when mobile attaches it gets a prefix from the /48. When DHCP-PD is called, has to be allocated say, particular /56 from the /48. == Jonne: this seems like a clear solution. Nodes behind the MR could use Mobile IP for their individual mobility if needed. == Alex: more than two or three solutions around. Also stated that he may be aware of a potential IPR on this topic. So, the problem seems relevant. == Carl: Adopt as a Working Group document. Chairs: how many people think the problem is relevant? 19(?) How many have read it: 7 How many think that the proposed solution in the draft can be starting point to work on the problem? In favor: 7 ; Opposed: 1 Alex: could help on problem, but not comment on solution. ............................................... 6. IP Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6 10 Mins I-D: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-01.txt Presenter: Sri Gundavelli/Jouni Korhonen - In PMIPv6: IPv4 home address to mobile node is anchored on home LMA - All IP traffic from that IPv4 address is reverse tunneled to home net. - Operators are exploring new ways to offload some IP traffic. - Also important: the inverse capability (DON'T offload ) - IP Traffic Offload Selector Option used to match packets for offload = Uses RFC 6088 - Filters: destination prefix, IP flow tuple, Application granularity, NAI/802.11 SSID, APN, Except-for - New option exchanged between MAG and LMA, using RFC 6088 option formats (IPv4 binary traffic selector option) - Offload Policy Enforcement on MAG - Basavaraj: how about assigning a different address for traffic to be offloaded. = Basavaraj: What about NAT bindings? = Sri: but today MN can only get one address = Rajeev: There are ways to move the NAT binding = Jonne: How does MAG know what to offload == Sri: LMA tells MAG, according to filter table = Bruno: What would trigger sending PBU with this option? == Sri: MAG could propose something == Rajeev: Could be proposed, and rejected... = Jonne: Hard to imagine how to populate the traffic filters with all the destination addresses = Liu Dapeng: How to tell about proximity of destination == Sri: it's about offloading the PDN-gw. Rough working group consensus to adopt as WG item and draft. 11 people think we should solve the problem, 4 think we should not. ML has to confirm adoption as starting WG doc ............................................... 7. Access Network Information Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6 10 Mins I-D: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-gundavelli-netext-access-network-option-01.txt Presenter: Jouni Korhonen - Need for LMA to offer differentiated services, charging, policing based on access network. = service treatment could depend on home/roaming, 802.11, operator - Proposal for new mobility option "ANI" MAG --> LMA = ANI == "Access Network Information" = Why not via AAA? doable, but relies on external infrastructure - New formats presented, showing Opertor Identifier option, Network identifier, etc. - Proposal to standardize the ANI option Raj : stay away from creating fixed options we don’t know yet Charlie: is MAG responsible to transport it to LMA, MAG is operated by one operator, APs by different – network sharing (ID) Alex: GSM, CDMA, … Jouni: NAI Alex: can we reuse? 5 have read the draft 4 think it is a relevant problem and we have to solve it 2 think it is no clear reason to carry more than ATT Chairs: Please read documents and review them. Chairs will poll the WG whether to work on this problem and adopt it as WG item on the ML.