idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-11.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (August 29, 2018) is 2066 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-14) exists of draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-12 == Outdated reference: A later version (-18) exists of draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-15 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 DMM H. Chan, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft X. Wei 4 Intended status: Informational Huawei Technologies 5 Expires: March 2, 2019 J. Lee 6 Sangmyung University 7 S. Jeon 8 Sungkyunkwan University 9 CJ. Bernardos, Ed. 10 UC3M 11 August 29, 2018 13 Distributed Mobility Anchoring 14 draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-11 16 Abstract 18 This document defines distributed mobility anchoring in terms of the 19 different configurations and functions to provide IP mobility 20 support. A network may be configured with distributed mobility 21 anchoring functions for both network-based or host-based mobility 22 support according to the needs of mobility support. In the 23 distributed mobility anchoring environment, multiple anchors are 24 available for mid-session switching of an IP prefix anchor. To start 25 a new flow or to handle a flow not requiring IP session continuity as 26 a mobile node moves to a new network, the flow can be started or re- 27 started using a new IP address configured from the new IP prefix 28 which is anchored to the new network. The mobility functions and 29 their operations and parameters are general for different 30 configurations. 32 Status of This Memo 34 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 35 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 37 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 38 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 39 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 40 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 42 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 43 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 44 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 45 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 47 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 2, 2019. 49 Copyright Notice 51 Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 52 document authors. All rights reserved. 54 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 55 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 56 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 57 publication of this document. Please review these documents 58 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 59 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 60 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 61 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 62 described in the Simplified BSD License. 64 Table of Contents 66 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 67 2. Conventions and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 68 3. Distributed Mobility Anchoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 3.1. Configurations for Different Networks . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 3.1.1. Network-based DMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 3.1.2. Client-based DMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 72 4. IP Mobility Handling in Distributed Anchoring Environments - 73 Mobility Support Only When Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 74 4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP 75 prefix/address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 76 4.2. Mobility case, traffic redirection . . . . . . . . . . . 10 77 4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 78 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 79 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 80 7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 81 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 82 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 83 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 84 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 86 1. Introduction 88 A key requirement in distributed mobility management [RFC7333] is to 89 enable traffic to avoid traversing a single mobility anchor far from 90 an optimal route. This document defines different configurations, 91 functional operations and parameters for distributed mobility 92 anchoring and explains how to use them to make the route changes to 93 avoid unnecessarily long routes. 95 Companion distributed mobility management documents are already 96 addressing the architecture and deployment 98 [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models], source address selection 99 [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility], and control-plane data-plane 100 signaling [I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp]. A number of distributed mobility 101 solutions have also been proposed, for example, in 102 [I-D.seite-dmm-dma], [I-D.bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif], 103 [I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi], [I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring], and 104 [I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc]. 106 Distributed mobility anchoring employs multiple anchors in the data 107 plane. In general, control plane functions may be separated from 108 data plane functions and be centralized but may also be co-located 109 with the data plane functions at the distributed anchors. Different 110 configurations of distributed mobility anchoring are described in 111 Section 3.1. 113 As a Mobile Node (MN) attaches to an access router and establishes a 114 link between them, a /64 IPv6 prefix anchored to the router may be 115 assigned to the link for exclusive use by the MN [RFC6459]. The MN 116 may then configure a global IPv6 address from this prefix and use it 117 as the source IP address in a flow to communicate with its 118 correspondent node (CN). When there are multiple mobility anchors 119 assigned to the same MN, an address selection for a given flow is 120 first required before the flow is initiated. Using an anchor in a 121 MN's network of attachment has the advantage that the packets can 122 simply be forwarded according to the forwarding table. However, 123 after the flow has been initiated, the MN may later move to another 124 network which assigns a new mobility anchor to the MN. Since the new 125 anchor is located in a different network, the MN's assigned prefix 126 and the built MN IP address do not belong to the network where the MN 127 is currently attached. 129 When the MN wants to continue using its assigned prefix and IP 130 address to complete ongoing data sessions after it moved to a new 131 network, the network needs to provide support for IP address- and 132 session continuity, since routing packets to the MN through the new 133 network deviates from applying default routes. The IP session 134 continuity needs of a flow (application) determines the how the IP 135 address used by the traffic of this flow has to be anchored. If the 136 ongoing IP flow can cope with an IP prefix/address change, the flow 137 can be reinitiated with a new IP address anchored in the new network. 138 On the other hand, if the ongoing IP flow cannot cope with such 139 change, mobility support is needed. A network supporting a mix of 140 flows both requiring and not requiring IP mobility support will need 141 to distinguish these flows. 143 2. Conventions and Terminology 145 All general mobility-related terms and their acronyms used in this 146 document are to be interpreted as defined in the Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) 147 base specification [RFC6275], the Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) 148 specification [RFC5213], the "Mobility Related Terminologies" 149 [RFC3753], and the DMM current practices and gap analysis [RFC7429]. 150 These include terms such as mobile node (MN), correspondent node 151 (CN), home agent (HA), home address (HoA), care-of-address (CoA), 152 local mobility anchor (LMA), and mobile access gateway (MAG). 154 In addition, this document uses the following terms: 156 Home network of a home address: the network that has assigned the 157 HoA used as the session identifier by the application running in 158 an MN. The MN may be running multiple application sessions, and 159 each of these sessions can have a different home network. 161 Anchor (of an IP prefix/address): An IP prefix, i.e., Home Network 162 Prefix (HNP), or address, i.e., HoA, assigned for use by an MN is 163 topologically anchored to an anchor node when the anchor node is 164 able to advertise a connected route into the routing 165 infrastructure for the assigned IP prefix. The traffic using the 166 assigned IP address/prefix must traverse the anchor node. We can 167 refer to the function performed by IP anchor node as anchoring, 168 which is a data plane function. 170 Location Management (LM) function: control plane function that keeps 171 and manages the network location information of an MN. The 172 location information may be a binding of the advertised IP 173 address/prefix, e.g., HoA or HNP, to the IP routing address of the 174 MN or of a node that can forward packets destined to the MN. 176 When the MN is a mobile router (MR) providing a mobile network of 177 mobile network nodes (MNN), the location information will also 178 include the mobile network prefix (MNP), which is the aggregate IP 179 prefix delegated to the MR to assign IP prefixes for use by the 180 MNNs in the mobile network. 182 In a client-server protocol model, location query and update 183 messages may be exchanged between a Location Management client 184 (LMc) and a Location Management server (LMs), where the location 185 information can be updated to or queried from the LMc. 186 Optionally, there may be a Location Management proxy (LMp) between 187 LMc and LMs. 189 With separation of control plane and data plane, the LM function 190 is in the control plane. It may be a logical function at the 191 control plane node, control plane anchor, or mobility controller. 193 It may be distributed or centralized. 195 Forwarding Management (FM) function: packet interception and 196 forwarding to/from the IP address/prefix assigned for use by the 197 MN, based on the internetwork location information, either to the 198 destination or to some other network element that knows how to 199 forward the packets to their destination. 201 This function may be used to achieve traffic indirection. With 202 separation of control plane and data plane, the FM function may 203 split into a FM function in the data plane (FM-DP) and a FM 204 function in the control plane (FM-CP). 206 FM-DP may be distributed with distributed mobility management. It 207 may be a function in a data plane anchor or data plane node. 209 FM-CP may be distributed or centralized. It may be a function in 210 a control plane node, control plane anchor or mobility controller. 212 3. Distributed Mobility Anchoring 214 3.1. Configurations for Different Networks 216 We next describe some configurations with multiple distributed 217 anchors. To cover the widest possible spectrum of scenarios, we 218 consider architectures in which the control and data planes are 219 separated, as described in [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models]. 221 3.1.1. Network-based DMM 223 Figure 1 shows a general scenario for network-based distributed 224 mobility management. 226 The main characteristics of a network-based DMM solution are: 228 o There are multiple data plane anchors (i.e., DPA instances), each 229 with a FM-DP function. 230 o The control plane may either be distributed (not shown in the 231 figure) or centralized (as shown in the figure). 232 o The control plane and the data plane (Control Plane Anchor -- CPA 233 -- and Data Plane Anchor -- DPA) may be co-located or not. If the 234 CPA is co-located with the distributed DPAs, then there are 235 multiple co-located CPA-DPA instances (not shown in the figure). 236 o An IP prefix/address IP1 (anchored to the DPA with IP address 237 IPa1) is assigned for use to a MN. The MN uses this IP1 address 238 to communicate with CNs (not shown in the figure). 239 o The location management (LM) function may be co-located or split 240 (as shown in the figure) into a separate server (LMs) and a client 241 (LMc). In this case, the LMs may be centralized whereas the LMc 242 may be distributed or centralized. 244 ____________ Network 245 ___/ \___________ 246 / +-----+ \___ 247 ( |LMs | Control \ 248 / +-.---+ plane \ 249 / +--------.---+ functions \ 250 ( |CPA: . | in the ) 251 ( |FM-CP, LMc | network ) 252 ( +------------+ \ 253 / . . \ 254 ( . . ) 255 ( . . ) 256 ( . . \ 257 \ +------------+ +------------+Distributed ) 258 ( |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): |DPAs ) 259 ( |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | _/ 260 \ |FM-DP | |FM-DP | etc. / 261 \ +------------+ +------------+ / 262 \___ Data plane _____/ 263 \______ functions / 264 \__________________/ 266 +------------+ 267 |MN(IP1) | Mobile node attached 268 |flow(IP1,..)| to the network 269 +------------+ 271 Figure 1: Network-based DMM configuration 273 3.1.2. Client-based DMM 275 Figure 2 shows a general scenario for client-based distributed 276 mobility management. In this configuration, the mobile node performs 277 Control Plane Node (CPN) and Data Plane Node (DPN) mobility 278 functions, namely the forwarding management and location management 279 (client) roles. 281 +-----+ 282 |LMs | 283 +-.---+ 284 +--------.---+ 285 |CPA: . | 286 |FM-CP, LMp | 287 +------------+ 288 . . 289 . . 290 . . 291 . . 292 +------------+ +------------+ Distributed 293 |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): | DPAs 294 |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | 295 |FM-DP | |FM-DP | etc. 296 +------------+ +------------+ 298 +------------+ 299 |MN(IP1) |Mobile node 300 |flow(IP1,..)|using IP1 301 |FM, LMc |anchored to 302 +------------+DPA(IPa1) 304 Figure 2: Client-based DMM configuration 306 4. IP Mobility Handling in Distributed Anchoring Environments - 307 Mobility Support Only When Needed 309 IP mobility support may be provided only when needed instead of being 310 provided by default. Three cases can be considered: 312 o Nomadic case: no address continuity is required. The IP address 313 used by the MN changes after movement and traffic using old 314 address is disrupted. If session continuity is required, then it 315 needs to be provided by a solution running at L4 or above. 316 o Mobility case, traffic redirection: address continuity is 317 required. When the MN moves, the previous anchor still anchors 318 traffic using the old IP address, and forwards it to the new MN's 319 location. The MN obtains a new IP address anchored at the new 320 location, and preferably uses it for new communications, 321 established while connected at the new location. 322 o Mobility case, anchor relocation: address continuity is required. 323 In this case the route followed by the traffic is optimized, by 324 using some means for traffic indirection to deviate from default 325 routes. 327 A straightforward choice of mobility anchoring is the following: the 328 MN's chooses as source IP address of packets belonging to an IP flow, 329 an address allocated by the network the MN is attached to when the 330 flow was initiated. As such, traffic belonging to this flow 331 traverses the MN's mobility anchor [I-D.seite-dmm-dma] 332 [I-D.bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif]. 334 The IP prefix/address at the MN's side of a flow may be anchored at 335 the access router to which the MN is attached. For example, when a 336 MN attaches to a network (Net1) or moves to a new network (Net2), an 337 IP prefix from the attached network is assigned to the MN's 338 interface. In addition to configuring new link-local addresses, the 339 MN configures from this prefix an IP address which is typically a 340 dynamic IP address. It then uses this IP address when a flow is 341 initiated. Packets to the MN in this flow are simply forwarded 342 according to the forwarding table. 344 There may be multiple IP prefixes/addresses that an MN can select 345 when initiating a flow. They may be from the same access network or 346 different access networks. The network may advertise these prefixes 347 with cost options [I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] so that the mobile node 348 may choose the one with the least cost. In addition, these IP 349 prefixes/addresses may be of different types regarding whether 350 mobility support is needed [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility]. A flow 351 will need to choose the appropriate one according to whether it needs 352 IP mobility support. 354 4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP prefix/ 355 address 357 When IP mobility support is not needed for a flow, the LM and FM 358 functions are not utilized so that the configurations in Section 3.1 359 are simplified as shown in Figure 3. 361 Net1 Net2 363 +---------------+ +---------------+ 364 |AR1 | AR is changed |AR2 | 365 +---------------+ -------> +---------------+ 366 |CPA: | |CPA: | 367 |---------------| |---------------| 368 |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): | 369 |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | 370 +---------------+ +---------------+ 372 +...............+ +---------------+ 373 .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2) | 374 .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP2,...) | 375 +...............+ +---------------+ 377 Figure 3: Changing to a new IP address/prefix 379 When there is no need to provide IP mobility to a flow, the flow may 380 use a new IP address acquired from a new network as the MN moves to 381 the new network. 383 Regardless of whether IP mobility is needed, if the flow has 384 terminated before the MN moves to a new network, the flow may 385 subsequently restart using the new IP address assigned from the new 386 network. 388 When IP session continuity is needed, even if a flow is ongoing as 389 the MN moves, it may still be desirable for the flow to change to 390 using the new IP prefix configured in the new network. The flow may 391 then close and then restart using a new IP address configured in the 392 new network. Such a change in the IP address of the flow may be 393 enabled using a higher layer mobility support which is not in the 394 scope of this document. 396 In Figure 3, a flow initiated while the MN was using the IP prefix 397 IP1 anchored to a previous access router AR1 in network Net1 has 398 terminated before the MN moves to a new network Net2. After moving 399 to Net2, the MN uses the new IP prefix IP2 anchored to a new access 400 router AR2 in network Net2 to start a new flow. The packets may then 401 be forwarded without requiring IP layer mobility support. 403 An example call flow is outlined in Figure 4. MN attaches to a 404 network and AR1 sends a router advertisement (RA) including 405 information about the prefix assigned to MN, from which MN configures 406 the IP address to use (IP1). This address is used for new 407 communications, for example with a correspondent node (CN). If the 408 MN moves to a new network and attaches to AR2, the process is 409 repeated (MN obtains a new IP address, IP2, from AR2). Since the IP 410 address (IP1) configured at the previously visited network is not 411 valid at the current attachment point, any existing flows have to be 412 reestablished using IP2. 414 MN AR1 AR2 CN 415 |MN attaches to AR1: | | | 416 |acquire MN-ID and profile | | 417 |--RS---------------->| | | 418 | | | | 419 |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | 420 | | | | 421 Assigned prefix IP1 | | | 422 IP1 address configuration | | 423 | | | | 424 |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| 425 | | | | 426 |MN detaches from AR1 | | | 427 |MN attaches to AR2 | | | 428 | | | | 429 |--RS------------------------------>| | 430 | | | | 431 |<--------------RA(IP2)-------------| | 432 | | | | 433 Assigned prefix IP2 | | | 434 IP2 address configuration | | 435 | | | | 436 |<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+---------------------------->| 437 | | | | 439 Figure 4: Re-starting a flow with new IP prefix/address 441 4.2. Mobility case, traffic redirection 443 When IP mobility is needed for a flow, the LM and FM functions in 444 Section 3.1 are utilized. There are two possible cases: (i) the 445 initial anchor remains the anchor and forwards traffic to a new 446 locator in the new network, and (ii) the mobility anchor (data plane 447 function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ 448 prefix. The latter enables optimized routes but requires some data 449 plane node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. Next, we 450 focus on the first case. The second one is addressed in Section 4.3. 452 Mobility support can be provided by using mobility management methods 453 such as ([Paper-Distributed.Mobility], 454 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] and 455 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review]). After moving, a certain MN's 456 traffic flow may continue using the IP prefix from the prior network 457 of attachment. Yet some time later, the user application for the 458 flow may be closed. If the application is started again, the new 459 flow may not need to use the prior network's IP address to avoid 460 having to invoke IP mobility support. This may be the case where a 461 dynamic IP prefix/address rather than a permanent one is used. The 462 flow may then use the new IP prefix in the network where the flow is 463 being initiated. Routing is again kept simpler without employing IP 464 mobility and will remain so as long as the MN which is now in the new 465 network has not moved again and left to another new network. 467 MN AR1 AR2 CN 468 |MN attaches to AR1: | | | 469 |acquire MN-ID and profile | | 470 |--RS---------------->| | | 471 | | | | 472 |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | 473 | | | | 474 Assigned prefix IP1 | | | 475 IP1 address configuration | | 476 | | | | 477 |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| 478 | | | | 479 |MN detach from AR1 | | | 480 |MN attach to AR2 | | | 481 | | | | 482 |--RS------------------------------>| | 483 IP mobility support such as that described in next sub-section 484 |<--------------RA(IP2,IP1)---------| | 485 | | | | 486 | +<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)---------------------->| 487 | +<===========>+ | 488 |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-------------->+ | 489 | | | | 490 Assigned prefix IP2 | | | 491 IP2 address configuration | | 492 | | | | 493 Flow(IP1,IPcn) terminates | | 494 | | | | 495 |<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+---------------------------->| 496 | | | | 498 Figure 5: A flow continues to use the IP prefix from its home network 499 after MN has moved to a new network 501 An example call flow in this case is outlined in Figure 5. In this 502 example, the AR1 plays the role of FM-DP entity and redirects the 503 traffic (e.g., using an IP tunnel) to AR2. Another solution could be 504 to place an FM-DP entity closer to the CN network to perform traffic 505 steering to deviate from default routes (which will bring the packet 506 to AR1 per default routing). The LM and FM functions are implemented 507 as shown in Figure 6. 509 Net1 Net2 511 +---------------+ +---------------+ 512 |AR1 | |AR2 | 513 +---------------+ +---------------+ 514 |CPA: | |CPA: | 515 | | |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | 516 |---------------| IP1 (anchored at Net1) |---------------| 517 |DPA(IPa1): | is redirected to Net2 |DPA(IPa2): | 518 |anchors IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2 | 519 +---------------+ +---------------+ 521 +...............+ +---------------+ 522 .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | 523 .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | 524 . . |flow(IP2,...) | 525 +...............+ +---------------+ 527 Figure 6: Anchor redirection 529 Multiple instances of DPAs (at access routers), which are providing 530 IP prefix to the MNs, are needed to provide distributed mobility 531 anchoring in an appropriate configuration such as those described in 532 Figure 1 (Section 3.1.1) for network-based distributed mobility or in 533 Figure 2 (Section 3.1.2) for client-based distributed mobility. 535 4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation 537 We focus next on the case where the mobility anchor (data plane 538 function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ 539 prefix. This enables optimized routes but requires some data plane 540 node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. 542 IP mobility is invoked to enable IP session continuity for an ongoing 543 flow as the MN moves to a new network. Here the anchoring of the IP 544 address of the flow is in the home network of the flow, which is not 545 in the current network of attachment. A centralized mobility 546 management mechanism may employ indirection from the anchor in the 547 home network to the current network of attachment. Yet it may be 548 difficult to avoid unnecessarily long route when the route between 549 the MN and the CN via the anchor in the home network is significantly 550 longer than the direct route between them. An alternative is to 551 switch the IP prefix/address anchoring to the new network. 553 The IP prefix/address anchoring may move without changing the IP 554 prefix/address of the flow. Here the LM and FM functions in Figure 1 555 in Section 3.1 are implemented as shown in Figure 7. 557 Net1 Net2 559 +---------------+ +---------------+ 560 |AR1 | |AR2 | 561 +---------------+ +---------------+ 563 |CPA: | |CPA: | 565 |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | |LM:IP1 at IPa2 | 566 | changes to | | | 567 | IP1 at IPa2 | | | 568 |---------------| |---------------| 569 |DPA(IPa1): | IP1 anchoring is effectively moved|DPA(IPa2): | 570 |anchored IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2,IP1| 571 +---------------+ +---------------+ 573 +...............+ +---------------+ 574 .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | 575 .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | 576 +...............+ +---------------+ 578 Figure 7: Anchor mobility 580 As an MN with an ongoing session moves to a new network, the flow may 581 preserve IP session continuity by moving the anchoring of the 582 original IP prefix/address of the flow to the new network. 584 One way to accomplish such a move is to use a centralized routing 585 protocol, but such a solution presents some scalability concerns and 586 its applicability is typically limited to small networks. 588 5. Security Considerations 590 Security protocols and mechanisms are employed to secure the network 591 and to make continuous security improvements, and a DMM solution is 592 required to support them [RFC7333]. 594 In a DMM deployment [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] various attacks 595 such as impersonation, denial of service, man-in-the-middle attacks 596 need to be prevented. 598 6. IANA Considerations 600 This document presents no IANA considerations. 602 7. Contributors 604 Alexandre Petrescu and Fred L. Templin had contributed to earlier 605 versions of this document regarding distributed anchoring for 606 hierarchical network and for network mobility, although these 607 extensions were removed to keep the document within reasonable 608 length. 610 This document has benefited from other work on mobility support in 611 SDN network, on providing mobility support only when needed, and on 612 mobility support in enterprise network. These works have been 613 referenced. While some of these authors have taken the work to 614 jointly write this document, others have contributed at least 615 indirectly by writing these drafts. The latter include Philippe 616 Bertin, Dapeng Liu, Satoru Matushima, Pierrick Seite, Jouni Korhonen, 617 and Sri Gundavelli. 619 Valuable comments have been received from John Kaippallimalil, 620 ChunShan Xiong, and Dapeng Liu. Dirk von Hugo, Byju Pularikkal, 621 Pierrick Seite have generously provided careful review with helpful 622 corrections and suggestions. Marco Liebsch and Lyle Bertz also 623 performed very detailed and helpful reviews of this document. 625 8. References 627 8.1. Normative References 629 [I-D.bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif] 630 Bernardos, C., Oliva, A., Giust, F., Zuniga, J., and A. 631 Mourad, "Proxy Mobile IPv6 extensions for Distributed 632 Mobility Management", draft-bernardos-dmm-pmipv6-dlif-01 633 (work in progress), March 2018. 635 [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] 636 Gundavelli, S. and S. Jeon, "DMM Deployment Models and 637 Architectural Considerations", draft-ietf-dmm-deployment- 638 models-04 (work in progress), May 2018. 640 [I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp] 641 Matsushima, S., Bertz, L., Liebsch, M., Gundavelli, S., 642 Moses, D., and C. Perkins, "Protocol for Forwarding Policy 643 Configuration (FPC) in DMM", draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-12 644 (work in progress), June 2018. 646 [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility] 647 Yegin, A., Moses, D., Kweon, K., Lee, J., Park, J., and S. 648 Jeon, "On Demand Mobility Management", draft-ietf-dmm- 649 ondemand-mobility-15 (work in progress), July 2018. 651 [I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc] 652 Matsushima, S. and R. Wakikawa, "Stateless user-plane 653 architecture for virtualized EPC (vEPC)", draft- 654 matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc-06 (work in progress), 655 March 2016. 657 [I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] 658 McCann, P. and J. Kaippallimalil, "Communicating Prefix 659 Cost to Mobile Nodes", draft-mccann-dmm-prefixcost-03 660 (work in progress), April 2016. 662 [I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi] 663 Sarikaya, B. and L. Li, "Distributed Mobility Management 664 Protocol for WiFi Users in Fixed Network", draft-sarikaya- 665 dmm-for-wifi-05 (work in progress), October 2017. 667 [I-D.seite-dmm-dma] 668 Seite, P., Bertin, P., and J. Lee, "Distributed Mobility 669 Anchoring", draft-seite-dmm-dma-07 (work in progress), 670 February 2014. 672 [I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring] 673 Kim, Y. and S. Jeon, "Enhanced Mobility Anchoring in 674 Distributed Mobility Management", draft-yhkim-dmm- 675 enhanced-anchoring-05 (work in progress), July 2016. 677 [RFC3753] Manner, J., Ed. and M. Kojo, Ed., "Mobility Related 678 Terminology", RFC 3753, DOI 10.17487/RFC3753, June 2004, 679 . 681 [RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Ed., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., 682 Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", 683 RFC 5213, DOI 10.17487/RFC5213, August 2008, 684 . 686 [RFC6275] Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility 687 Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, DOI 10.17487/RFC6275, July 688 2011, . 690 [RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Ed., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, 691 T., Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation 692 Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)", 693 RFC 6459, DOI 10.17487/RFC6459, January 2012, 694 . 696 [RFC7333] Chan, H., Ed., Liu, D., Seite, P., Yokota, H., and J. 697 Korhonen, "Requirements for Distributed Mobility 698 Management", RFC 7333, DOI 10.17487/RFC7333, August 2014, 699 . 701 [RFC7429] Liu, D., Ed., Zuniga, JC., Ed., Seite, P., Chan, H., and 702 CJ. Bernardos, "Distributed Mobility Management: Current 703 Practices and Gap Analysis", RFC 7429, 704 DOI 10.17487/RFC7429, January 2015, 705 . 707 8.2. Informative References 709 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility] 710 Lee, J., Bonnin, J., Seite, P., and H. Chan, "Distributed 711 IP Mobility Management from the Perspective of the IETF: 712 Motivations, Requirements, Approaches, Comparison, and 713 Challenges", IEEE Wireless Communications, October 2013. 715 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] 716 Chan, H., "Proxy Mobile IP with Distributed Mobility 717 Anchors", Proceedings of GlobeCom Workshop on Seamless 718 Wireless Mobility, December 2010. 720 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review] 721 Chan, H., Yokota, H., Xie, J., Seite, P., and D. Liu, 722 "Distributed and Dynamic Mobility Management in Mobile 723 Internet: Current Approaches and Issues", February 2011. 725 Authors' Addresses 727 H. Anthony Chan (editor) 728 Huawei Technologies 729 5340 Legacy Dr. Building 3 730 Plano, TX 75024 731 USA 733 Email: h.a.chan@ieee.org 734 Xinpeng Wei 735 Huawei Technologies 736 Xin-Xi Rd. No. 3, Haidian District 737 Beijing, 100095 738 P. R. China 740 Email: weixinpeng@huawei.com 742 Jong-Hyouk Lee 743 Sangmyung University 744 31, Sangmyeongdae-gil, Dongnam-gu 745 Cheonan 31066 746 Republic of Korea 748 Email: jonghyouk@smu.ac.kr 750 Seil Jeon 751 Sungkyunkwan University 752 2066 Seobu-ro, Jangan-gu 753 Suwon, Gyeonggi-do 754 Republic of Korea 756 Email: seiljeon@skku.edu 758 Carlos J. Bernardos (editor) 759 Universidad Carlos III de Madrid 760 Av. Universidad, 30 761 Leganes, Madrid 28911 762 Spain 764 Phone: +34 91624 6236 765 Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es 766 URI: http://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/