idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13.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 (March 26, 2019) is 1829 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for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-14) exists of draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-12 == Outdated reference: A later version (-18) exists of draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-17 == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of draft-ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif-04 == Outdated reference: A later version (-25) exists of draft-ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp-01 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 1 comment (--).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: September 27, 2019 J. Lee 6 Sangmyung University 7 S. Jeon 8 Sungkyunkwan University 9 CJ. Bernardos, Ed. 10 UC3M 11 March 26, 2019 13 Distributed Mobility Anchoring 14 draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13 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 a distributed 23 mobility anchoring environment, multiple anchors are available for 24 mid-session switching of an IP prefix anchor. To start a new flow or 25 to handle a flow not requiring IP session continuity as a mobile node 26 moves to a new network, the flow can be started or re-started using 27 an IP address configured from the new IP prefix anchored to the new 28 network. If the flow needs to survive the change of network, there 29 are solutions that can be used to enable IP address mobility. This 30 document describes different anchoring approaches, depending on the 31 IP mobility needs, and how this IP address mobility is handled by the 32 network. 34 Status of This Memo 36 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 37 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 39 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 40 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 41 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 42 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 44 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 45 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 46 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 47 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 48 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 27, 2019. 50 Copyright Notice 52 Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 53 document authors. All rights reserved. 55 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 56 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 57 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 58 publication of this document. Please review these documents 59 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 60 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 61 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 62 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 63 described in the Simplified BSD License. 65 Table of Contents 67 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 68 2. Conventions and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 3. Distributed Mobility Anchoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 3.1. Configurations for Different Networks . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 3.1.1. Network-based DMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 72 3.1.2. Client-based DMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 73 4. IP Mobility Handling in Distributed Anchoring Environments - 74 Mobility Support Only When Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 75 4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP 76 prefix/address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 77 4.2. Mobility case, traffic redirection . . . . . . . . . . . 10 78 4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 79 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 80 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 81 7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 82 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 83 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 84 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 85 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 87 1. Introduction 89 A key requirement in distributed mobility management [RFC7333] is to 90 enable traffic to avoid traversing a single mobility anchor far from 91 an optimal route. This document defines different configurations, 92 functional operations and parameters for distributed mobility 93 anchoring and explains how to use them to avoid unnecessarily long 94 routes when a mobile node moves. 96 Companion distributed mobility management documents are already 97 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.ietf-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 does not belong to the network where the MN is currently attached. 128 When the MN wants to continue using its assigned prefix to complete 129 ongoing data sessions after it has moved to a new network, the 130 network needs to provide support for the MN's IP address -- and 131 session continuity, since routing packets to the MN through the new 132 network deviates from applying default routes. The IP session 133 continuity needs of a flow (application) determines how the IP 134 address used by this flow has to be anchored. If the ongoing IP flow 135 can cope with an IP prefix/address change, the flow can be 136 reinitiated with a new IP address anchored in the new network. On 137 the other hand, if the ongoing IP flow cannot cope with such change, 138 mobility support is needed. A network supporting a mix of flows both 139 requiring and not requiring IP mobility support will need to 140 distinguish these flows. 142 2. Conventions and Terminology 144 All general mobility-related terms and their acronyms used in this 145 document are to be interpreted as defined in the Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) 146 base specification [RFC6275], the Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) 147 specification [RFC5213], the "Mobility Related Terminologies" 148 [RFC3753], and the DMM current practices and gap analysis [RFC7429]. 149 These include terms such as mobile node (MN), correspondent node 150 (CN), home agent (HA), home address (HoA), care-of-address (CoA), 151 local mobility anchor (LMA), and mobile access gateway (MAG). 153 In addition, this document uses the following terms: 155 Home network of a home address: the network that has assigned the 156 HoA used as the session identifier by the application running in 157 an MN. The MN may be running multiple application sessions, and 158 each of these sessions can have a different home network. 160 Anchoring (of an IP prefix/address): An IP prefix, i.e., Home 161 Network Prefix (HNP), or address, i.e., HoA, assigned for use by 162 an MN is topologically anchored to an anchor node when the anchor 163 node is able to advertise a connected route into the routing 164 infrastructure for the assigned IP prefix. The traffic using the 165 assigned IP address/prefix must traverse the anchor node. We can 166 refer to the function performed by IP anchor node as anchoring, 167 which is a data plane function. 169 Location Management (LM) function: control plane function that keeps 170 and manages the network location information of an MN. The 171 location information may be a binding of the advertised IP 172 address/prefix, e.g., HoA or HNP, to the IP routing address of the 173 MN or of a node that can forward packets destined to the MN. 175 When the MN is a mobile router (MR), the location information will 176 also include the mobile network prefix (MNP), which is the 177 aggregate IP prefix delegated to the MR to assign IP prefixes for 178 use by the mobile network nodes (MNNs) in the mobile network. 180 In a client-server protocol model, location query and update 181 messages may be exchanged between a Location Management client 182 (LMc) and a Location Management server (LMs), where the location 183 information can be updated to or queried from the LMc. 184 Optionally, there may be a Location Management proxy (LMp) between 185 LMc and LMs. 187 With separation of control plane and data plane, the LM function 188 is in the control plane. It may be a logical function at the 189 control plane node, control plane anchor, or mobility controller. 191 It may be distributed or centralized. 193 Forwarding Management (FM) function: packet interception and 194 forwarding to/from the IP address/prefix assigned for use by the 195 MN, based on the internetwork location information, either to the 196 destination or to some other network element that knows how to 197 forward the packets to their destination. 199 This function may be used to achieve traffic indirection. With 200 separation of control plane and data plane, the FM function may 201 split into a FM function in the data plane (FM-DP) and a FM 202 function in the control plane (FM-CP). 204 FM-DP may be distributed with distributed mobility management. It 205 may be a function in a data plane anchor or data plane node. 207 FM-CP may be distributed or centralized. It may be a function in 208 a control plane node, control plane anchor or mobility controller. 210 3. Distributed Mobility Anchoring 212 3.1. Configurations for Different Networks 214 We next describe some configurations with multiple distributed 215 anchors. To cover the widest possible spectrum of scenarios, we 216 consider architectures in which the control and data planes are 217 separated, as described in [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models]. 219 3.1.1. Network-based DMM 221 Figure 1 shows a general scenario for network-based distributed 222 mobility management. 224 The main characteristics of a network-based DMM solution are: 226 o There are multiple data plane anchors, each with a FM-DP function. 227 o The control plane may either be distributed (not shown in the 228 figure) or centralized (as shown in the figure). 229 o The control plane and the data plane (Control Plane Anchor -- CPA 230 -- and Data Plane Anchor -- DPA) may be co-located or not. If the 231 CPA is co-located with the distributed DPAs, then there are 232 multiple co-located CPA-DPA instances (not shown in the figure). 233 o An IP prefix/address IP1 (anchored to the DPA with IP address 234 IPa1) is assigned for use to a MN. The MN uses this IP1 address 235 to communicate with CNs (not shown in the figure). 236 o The location management (LM) function may be co-located or split 237 (as shown in the figure) into a separate server (LMs) and a client 238 (LMc). In this case, the LMs may be centralized whereas the LMc 239 may be distributed or centralized. 241 ____________ Network 242 ___/ \___________ 243 / +-----+ \___ 244 ( |LMs | Control \ 245 / +-.---+ plane \ 246 / +--------.---+ functions \ 247 ( |CPA: . | in the ) 248 ( |FM-CP, LMc | network ) 249 ( +------------+ \ 250 / . . \ 251 ( . . ) 252 ( . . ) 253 ( . . \ 254 \ +------------+ +------------+Distributed ) 255 ( |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): |DPAs ) 256 ( |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | _/ 257 \ |FM-DP | |FM-DP | etc. / 258 \ +------------+ +------------+ / 259 \___ Data plane _____/ 260 \______ functions / 261 \__________________/ 263 +------------+ 264 |MN(IP1) | Mobile node attached 265 |flow(IP1,..)| to the network 266 +------------+ 268 Figure 1: Network-based DMM configuration 270 3.1.2. Client-based DMM 272 Figure 2 shows a general scenario for client-based distributed 273 mobility management. In this configuration, the mobile node performs 274 Control Plane Node (CPN) and Data Plane Node (DPN) mobility 275 functions, namely the forwarding management and location management 276 (client) roles. 278 +-----+ 279 |LMs | 280 +-.---+ 281 +--------.---+ 282 |CPA: . | 283 |FM-CP, LMp | 284 +------------+ 285 . . 286 . . 287 . . 288 . . 289 +------------+ +------------+ Distributed 290 |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): | DPAs 291 |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | 292 |FM-DP | |FM-DP | etc. 293 +------------+ +------------+ 295 +------------+ 296 |MN(IP1) |Mobile node 297 |flow(IP1,..)|using IP1 298 |FM, LMc |anchored to 299 +------------+DPA(IPa1) 301 Figure 2: Client-based DMM configuration 303 4. IP Mobility Handling in Distributed Anchoring Environments - 304 Mobility Support Only When Needed 306 IP mobility support may be provided only when needed instead of being 307 provided by default. Three cases can be considered: 309 o Nomadic case: no address continuity is required. The IP address 310 used by the MN changes after a movement and traffic using the old 311 address is disrupted. If session continuity is required, then it 312 needs to be provided by a solution running at L4 or above. 313 o Mobility case, traffic redirection: address continuity is 314 required. When the MN moves, the previous anchor still anchors 315 the traffic using the old IP address, and forwards it to the new 316 MN's location. The MN obtains a new IP address anchored to the 317 new location, and preferably uses it for new communications, 318 established while connected at the new location. 319 o Mobility case, anchor relocation: address continuity is required. 320 In this case the route followed by the traffic is optimized, by 321 using some means for traffic indirection to deviate from default 322 routes. 324 A straightforward choice of mobility anchoring is the following: the 325 MN's chooses as source IP address for packets belonging to an IP 326 flow, an address allocated by the network the MN is attached to when 327 the flow was initiated. As such, traffic belonging to this flow 328 traverses the MN's mobility anchor [I-D.seite-dmm-dma] 329 [I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif]. 331 The IP prefix/address at the MN's side of a flow may be anchored to 332 the access router to which the MN is attached. For example, when a 333 MN attaches to a network (Net1) or moves to a new network (Net2), an 334 IP prefix from the attached network is assigned to the MN's 335 interface. In addition to configuring new link-local addresses, the 336 MN configures from this prefix an IP address which is typically a 337 dynamic IP address. It then uses this IP address when a flow is 338 initiated. Packets from this flow addressed to the MN are simply 339 forwarded according to the forwarding table. 341 There may be multiple IP prefixes/addresses that an MN can select 342 when initiating a flow. They may be from the same access network or 343 different access networks. The network may advertise these prefixes 344 with cost options [I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] so that the mobile node 345 may choose the one with the least cost. In addition, these IP 346 prefixes/addresses may be of different types regarding whether 347 mobility support is needed [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility]. A MN 348 will need to choose which IP prefix/address to use for each flow 349 according to whether it needs IP mobility support or not. 351 4.1. Nomadic case (no need of IP mobility): Changing to new IP prefix/ 352 address 354 When IP mobility support is not needed for a flow, the LM and FM 355 functions are not utilized so that the configurations in Section 3.1 356 are simplified as shown in Figure 3. 358 Net1 Net2 360 +---------------+ +---------------+ 361 |AR1 | AR is changed |AR2 | 362 +---------------+ -------> +---------------+ 363 |CPA: | |CPA: | 364 |---------------| |---------------| 365 |DPA(IPa1): | |DPA(IPa2): | 366 |anchors IP1 | |anchors IP2 | 367 +---------------+ +---------------+ 369 +...............+ +---------------+ 370 .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2) | 371 .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP2,...) | 372 +...............+ +---------------+ 374 Figure 3: Changing to a new IP address/prefix 376 When there is no need to provide IP mobility to a flow, the flow may 377 use a new IP address acquired from a new network as the MN moves to 378 the new network. 380 Regardless of whether IP mobility is needed, if the flow has not 381 terminated before the MN moves to a new network, the flow may 382 subsequently restart using the new IP address assigned from the new 383 network. 385 When IP session continuity is needed, even if a flow is ongoing as 386 the MN moves, it may still be desirable for the flow to change to 387 using the new IP prefix configured in the new network. The flow may 388 then close and then restart using a new IP address configured in the 389 new network. Such a change in the IP address of the flow may be 390 enabled using a higher layer mobility support which is not in the 391 scope of this document. 393 In Figure 3, a flow initiated while the MN was using the IP prefix 394 IP1 -- anchored to a previous access router AR1 in network Net1 -- 395 has terminated before the MN moves to a new network Net2. After 396 moving to Net2, the MN uses the new IP prefix IP2 -- anchored to a 397 new access router AR2 in network Net2 -- to start a new flow. 398 Packets may then be forwarded without requiring IP layer mobility 399 support. 401 An example call flow is outlined in Figure 4. A MN attaches to AR1, 402 which sends a router advertisement (RA) including information about 403 the prefix assigned to MN, from which MN configures an IP address 404 (IP1). This address is used for new communications, for example with 405 a correspondent node (CN). If the MN moves to a new network and 406 attaches to AR2, the process is repeated (MN obtains a new IP 407 address, IP2, from AR2). Since the IP address (IP1) configured at 408 the previously visited network is not valid at the current attachment 409 point, and any existing flows have to be reestablished using IP2. 411 MN AR1 AR2 CN 412 |MN attaches to AR1: | | | 413 |acquires MN-ID and profile | | 414 |--RS---------------->| | | 415 | | | | 416 |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | 417 | | | | 418 Assigned prefix IP1 | | | 419 IP1 address configuration | | 420 | | | | 421 |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| 422 | | | | 423 |MN detaches from AR1 | | | 424 |MN attaches to AR2 | | | 425 | | | | 426 |--RS------------------------------>| | 427 | | | | 428 |<--------------RA(IP2)-------------| | 429 | | | | 430 Assigned prefix IP2 | | | 431 IP2 address configuration | | 432 | | | | 433 |<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+---------------------------->| 434 | | | | 436 Figure 4: Re-starting a flow with new IP prefix/address 438 4.2. Mobility case, traffic redirection 440 When IP mobility is needed for a flow, the LM and FM functions in 441 Section 3.1 are utilized. There are two possible cases: (i) the 442 initial anchor remains the anchor and forwards traffic to a new 443 locator in the new network, and (ii) the mobility anchor (data plane 444 function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ 445 prefix. The latter enables optimized routes but requires some data 446 plane node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. Next, we 447 focus on the first case. The second one is addressed in Section 4.3. 449 Mobility support can be provided by using mobility management 450 methods, such as the several approaches surveyed in the academic 451 papers ([Paper-Distributed.Mobility], 452 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] and 453 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review]). After moving, a certain MN's 454 traffic flow may continue using the IP prefix from the prior network 455 of attachment. Yet, some time later, the application generating this 456 traffic flow may be closed. If the application is started again, the 457 new flow may not need to use the prior network's IP address to avoid 458 having to invoke IP mobility support. This may be the case where a 459 dynamic IP prefix/address, rather than a permanent one, is used. 460 Packets belonging to this flow may then use the new IP prefix (the 461 one allocated in the network where the flow is being initiated). 462 Routing is again kept simpler without employing IP mobility and will 463 remain so as long as the MN which is now in the new network does not 464 move again to another network. 466 MN AR1 AR2 CN 467 |MN attaches to AR1: | | | 468 |acquires MN-ID and profile | | 469 |--RS---------------->| | | 470 | | | | 471 |<----------RA(IP1)---| | | 472 | | | | 473 Assigned prefix IP1 | | | 474 IP1 address configuration | | 475 | | | | 476 |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-+------------------------------------------>| 477 | | | | 478 |MN detaches from AR1 | | | 479 |MN attaches to AR2 | | | 480 | | | | 481 |--RS------------------------------>| | 482 (some IP mobility support solution) 483 |<--------------RA(IP2,IP1)---------| | 484 | | | | 485 | +<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)---------------------->| 486 | +<===========>+ | 487 |<-Flow(IP1,IPcn,...)-------------->+ | 488 | | | | 489 Assigned prefix IP2 | | | 490 IP2 address configuration | | 491 | | | | 492 Flow(IP1,IPcn) terminates | | 493 | | | | 494 |<-new Flow(IP2,IPcn,...)-----------+---------------------------->| 495 | | | | 497 Figure 5: A flow continues to use the IP prefix from its home network 498 after MN has moved to a new network 500 An example call flow in this case is outlined in Figure 5. In this 501 example, the AR1 plays the role of FM-DP entity and redirects the 502 traffic (e.g., using an IP tunnel) to AR2. Another solution could be 503 to place an FM-DP entity closer to the CN network to perform traffic 504 steering to deviate from default routes (which will bring the packet 505 to AR1 per default routing). The LM and FM functions are implemented 506 as shown in Figure 6. 508 Net1 Net2 510 +---------------+ +---------------+ 511 |AR1 | |AR2 | 512 +---------------+ +---------------+ 513 |CPA: | |CPA: | 514 | | |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | 515 |---------------| IP1 (anchored to Net1) |---------------| 516 |DPA(IPa1): | is redirected to Net2 |DPA(IPa2): | 517 |anchors IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2 | 518 +---------------+ +---------------+ 520 +...............+ +---------------+ 521 .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | 522 .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | 523 . . |flow(IP2,...) | 524 +...............+ +---------------+ 526 Figure 6: Anchor redirection 528 Multiple instances of DPAs (at access routers), which are providing 529 IP prefixes to the MNs, are needed to provide distributed mobility 530 anchoring in an appropriate configuration such as those described in 531 Figure 1 (Section 3.1.1) for network-based distributed mobility or in 532 Figure 2 (Section 3.1.2) for client-based distributed mobility. 534 4.3. Mobility case, anchor relocation 536 We focus next on the case where the mobility anchor (data plane 537 function) is changed but binds the MN's transferred IP address/ 538 prefix. This enables optimized routes but requires some data plane 539 node that enforces rules for traffic indirection. 541 IP mobility is invoked to enable IP session continuity for an ongoing 542 flow as the MN moves to a new network. Here the anchoring of the IP 543 address of the flow is in the home network of the flow (i.e., 544 different from the current network of attachment). A centralized 545 mobility management mechanism may employ indirection from the anchor 546 in the home network to the current network of attachment. Yet it may 547 be difficult to avoid using an unnecessarily long route (when the 548 route between the MN and the CN via the anchor in the home network is 549 significantly longer than the direct route between them). An 550 alternative is to move the IP prefix/address anchoring to the new 551 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 +---------------+ +---------------+ 562 |CPA: | |CPA: | 563 |LM:IP1 at IPa1 | |LM:IP1 at IPa2 | 564 | changes to | | | 565 | IP1 at IPa2 | | | 566 |---------------| |---------------| 567 |DPA(IPa1): | IP1 anchoring effectively moved |DPA(IPa2): | 568 |anchored IP1 | =======> |anchors IP2,IP1| 569 +---------------+ +---------------+ 571 +...............+ +---------------+ 572 .MN(IP1) . MN moves |MN(IP2,IP1) | 573 .flow(IP1,...) . =======> |flow(IP1,...) | 574 +...............+ +---------------+ 576 Figure 7: Anchor mobility 578 As an MN with an ongoing session moves to a new network, the flow may 579 preserve IP session continuity by moving the anchoring of the 580 original IP prefix/address of the flow to the new network. 582 One way to accomplish such a move is to use a centralized routing 583 protocol, but such a solution may present some scalability concerns 584 and its applicability is typically limited to small networks. One 585 example of this type of solution is described in 586 [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp]. When a mobile associates with an anchor 587 the anchor injects the mobile's prefix into the global routing 588 system. If the mobile moves to a new anchor, the old anchor 589 withdraws the /64 and the new anchor injects it instead. 591 5. Security Considerations 593 Security protocols and mechanisms are employed to secure the network 594 and to make continuous security improvements, and a DMM solution is 595 required to support them [RFC7333]. 597 In a DMM deployment [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] various attacks 598 such as impersonation, denial of service, man-in-the-middle attacks 599 need to be prevented. 601 6. IANA Considerations 603 This document presents no IANA considerations. 605 7. Contributors 607 Alexandre Petrescu and Fred Templin had contributed to earlier 608 versions of this document regarding distributed anchoring for 609 hierarchical network and for network mobility, although these 610 extensions were removed to keep the document within reasonable 611 length. 613 This document has benefited from other work on mobility support in 614 SDN network, on providing mobility support only when needed, and on 615 mobility support in enterprise network. These works have been 616 referenced. While some of these authors have taken the work to 617 jointly write this document, others have contributed at least 618 indirectly by writing these drafts. The latter include Philippe 619 Bertin, Dapeng Liu, Satoru Matushima, Pierrick Seite, Jouni Korhonen, 620 and Sri Gundavelli. 622 Valuable comments have been received from John Kaippallimalil, 623 ChunShan Xiong, Dapeng Liu and Fred Templin. Dirk von Hugo, Byju 624 Pularikkal, Pierrick Seite have generously provided careful review 625 with helpful corrections and suggestions. Marco Liebsch and Lyle 626 Bertz also performed very detailed and helpful reviews of this 627 document. 629 8. References 631 8.1. Normative References 633 [RFC3753] Manner, J., Ed. and M. Kojo, Ed., "Mobility Related 634 Terminology", RFC 3753, DOI 10.17487/RFC3753, June 2004, 635 . 637 [RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Ed., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., 638 Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", 639 RFC 5213, DOI 10.17487/RFC5213, August 2008, 640 . 642 [RFC6275] Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility 643 Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, DOI 10.17487/RFC6275, July 644 2011, . 646 [RFC7333] Chan, H., Ed., Liu, D., Seite, P., Yokota, H., and J. 647 Korhonen, "Requirements for Distributed Mobility 648 Management", RFC 7333, DOI 10.17487/RFC7333, August 2014, 649 . 651 [RFC7429] Liu, D., Ed., Zuniga, JC., Ed., Seite, P., Chan, H., and 652 CJ. Bernardos, "Distributed Mobility Management: Current 653 Practices and Gap Analysis", RFC 7429, 654 DOI 10.17487/RFC7429, January 2015, 655 . 657 8.2. Informative References 659 [I-D.ietf-dmm-deployment-models] 660 Gundavelli, S. and S. Jeon, "DMM Deployment Models and 661 Architectural Considerations", draft-ietf-dmm-deployment- 662 models-04 (work in progress), May 2018. 664 [I-D.ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp] 665 Matsushima, S., Bertz, L., Liebsch, M., Gundavelli, S., 666 Moses, D., and C. Perkins, "Protocol for Forwarding Policy 667 Configuration (FPC) in DMM", draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-12 668 (work in progress), June 2018. 670 [I-D.ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility] 671 Yegin, A., Moses, D., and S. Jeon, "On Demand Mobility 672 Management", draft-ietf-dmm-ondemand-mobility-17 (work in 673 progress), February 2019. 675 [I-D.ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif] 676 Bernardos, C., Oliva, A., Giust, F., Zuniga, J., and A. 677 Mourad, "Proxy Mobile IPv6 extensions for Distributed 678 Mobility Management", draft-ietf-dmm-pmipv6-dlif-04 (work 679 in progress), January 2019. 681 [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-atn-bgp] 682 Templin, F., Saccone, G., Dawra, G., Lindem, A., and V. 683 Moreno, "A Simple BGP-based Mobile Routing System for the 684 Aeronautical Telecommunications Network", draft-ietf- 685 rtgwg-atn-bgp-01 (work in progress), January 2019. 687 [I-D.matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc] 688 Matsushima, S. and R. Wakikawa, "Stateless user-plane 689 architecture for virtualized EPC (vEPC)", draft- 690 matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc-06 (work in progress), 691 March 2016. 693 [I-D.mccann-dmm-prefixcost] 694 McCann, P. and J. Kaippallimalil, "Communicating Prefix 695 Cost to Mobile Nodes", draft-mccann-dmm-prefixcost-03 696 (work in progress), April 2016. 698 [I-D.sarikaya-dmm-for-wifi] 699 Sarikaya, B. and L. Li, "Distributed Mobility Management 700 Protocol for WiFi Users in Fixed Network", draft-sarikaya- 701 dmm-for-wifi-05 (work in progress), October 2017. 703 [I-D.seite-dmm-dma] 704 Seite, P., Bertin, P., and J. Lee, "Distributed Mobility 705 Anchoring", draft-seite-dmm-dma-07 (work in progress), 706 February 2014. 708 [I-D.yhkim-dmm-enhanced-anchoring] 709 Kim, Y. and S. Jeon, "Enhanced Mobility Anchoring in 710 Distributed Mobility Management", draft-yhkim-dmm- 711 enhanced-anchoring-05 (work in progress), July 2016. 713 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility] 714 Lee, J., Bonnin, J., Seite, P., and H. Chan, "Distributed 715 IP Mobility Management from the Perspective of the IETF: 716 Motivations, Requirements, Approaches, Comparison, and 717 Challenges", IEEE Wireless Communications, October 2013. 719 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.PMIP] 720 Chan, H., "Proxy Mobile IP with Distributed Mobility 721 Anchors", Proceedings of GlobeCom Workshop on Seamless 722 Wireless Mobility, December 2010. 724 [Paper-Distributed.Mobility.Review] 725 Chan, H., Yokota, H., Xie, J., Seite, P., and D. Liu, 726 "Distributed and Dynamic Mobility Management in Mobile 727 Internet: Current Approaches and Issues", February 2011. 729 [RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Ed., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, 730 T., Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation 731 Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)", 732 RFC 6459, DOI 10.17487/RFC6459, January 2012, 733 . 735 Authors' Addresses 736 H. Anthony Chan (editor) 737 Huawei Technologies 738 5340 Legacy Dr. Building 3 739 Plano, TX 75024 740 USA 742 Email: h.a.chan@ieee.org 744 Xinpeng Wei 745 Huawei Technologies 746 Xin-Xi Rd. No. 3, Haidian District 747 Beijing, 100095 748 P. R. China 750 Email: weixinpeng@huawei.com 752 Jong-Hyouk Lee 753 Sangmyung University 754 31, Sangmyeongdae-gil, Dongnam-gu 755 Cheonan 31066 756 Republic of Korea 758 Email: jonghyouk@smu.ac.kr 760 Seil Jeon 761 Sungkyunkwan University 762 2066 Seobu-ro, Jangan-gu 763 Suwon, Gyeonggi-do 764 Republic of Korea 766 Email: seiljeon@skku.edu 768 Carlos J. Bernardos (editor) 769 Universidad Carlos III de Madrid 770 Av. Universidad, 30 771 Leganes, Madrid 28911 772 Spain 774 Phone: +34 91624 6236 775 Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es 776 URI: http://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/