Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Tomorrow's Telecon material



Pl. find the document for tomorrow's telecon. We  will discuss the 
slides. Also attaching
a drafty draft.  Folks are working on it.  The IETF draft submission 
deadline is on March 6, 
9:00 EST.  Hopefully we will have a stable version by then.  

Regards,
-Subir

21-06-0348-05-0000-IS_Transport_requirements.ppt



     Media independent Information Service (MIIS) and Its Higher
     Layer Transport Requirements   
                 

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable 
   patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on xx, 2006.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).




Abstract

   Media Independent Information Service (MIS) Information Services provides a framework by which a MIH (Media Independent Handover) function both in the mobile node and in the network can discover and obtain network information (both homogeneous and heterogeneous) within a geographical region to facilitate handovers. MIS includes support for various Information Elements (IEs). These IEs provide information that is essential for a handover function to make intelligent handover decision.  The MIH function in a mobile node or network can obtain such network information (e.g., IEs)  via  both lower as well as  higher layers.  

   This document is an effort to describe use cases and requirements for  higher layers Information Service while the information is  transported over IP and above layers.







1.  Introduction
   

   Media Independent Handover Services are a class of network services, 
   which    aim to improve the quality of handovers available to mobile 
   devices.   In order to support more intelligent handover services it 
   is often necessary to be able to exchange information between mobile 
   and fixed nodes within the network.

   IEEE 802.21 working group is currently defining three broad classes of 
   such services to facilitate the handover.  They require passing of 
   information within hosts, as well as between them:

1.1 Media Independent Event Services (MIES) provide indications from 
lower layers about changes in the connectivity state [802.21 draft]. 
Events are of two kinds: local and remote. In case of local events,
information typically propagate upwards from L2 to MIH 
function and MIH function to upper layers within a local stack. In 
case of remote events, however, information may propagate from MIH 
or upper layers in one stack to MIH or upper layers in another stack. 
     
1.2  Media Independent Command Services (MICS) provide mechanisms for
Controlling handovers [802.21 draft]. It includes the commands from 
upper layer to MIH and from MIH to lower layer. These commands mainly 
carry the upper layer decisions to the lower layers. 

1.3 Media Independent Information Service (MIIS) Information Services 
provides a framework by which a MIHF (Media Independent Handover Function) 
both in the mobile node and in the network can discover and
obtain homogeneous and heterogeneous network information within 
a geographical region to facilitate handovers [802.21 draft]. MIIS 
includes support for various Information Elements (IEs). These IEs
provide information that is essential for a handover function to make
intelligent handover decision. The information can be made available 
via both lower as well as higher layers. 

   



1.1  Higher Layer Information Services

   Higher layer Information Services are considered to be an important component
   of handover services for both horizontal and vertical handovers. Depending 
   upon the type of mobility support, different IEs may be necessary for 
   performing handovers. In cases where these IEs are not available natively by 
   the access network, higher layer information service is the only means to
   obtain such information. Also for vertical handovers, information about 
   heterogeneous networks is essential for mobile devices to decide the best
   network to handover that preserve the service and session continuity [802.21 
   draft]. These services are typically provided by information servers that are
   either available locally or can be contacted remotely. 


   Information provided varies dependent on the purpose and operation of the information service, but may consist of:  list of neighboring access networks, network operator list, roaming partners, wireless channel information (e.g., data rate, MAC type) etc. In particular, [802.21 Draft] document defines four  classes of information elements: i) General access network information such as, 
List of operators, List of networks, etc; ii) Information about Point of Attachment (PoA) such as, location of PoA, address of PoA, etc; and iii) Higher layer information such as, subnet information, capability information, and iv) Vendor specific IEs. The delivery of such information relies upon the following  reference model as defined by IEEE 802.21. 
 

2. Information Service Reference Model 

   Entities involved with handover information services perform the roles of an 
   Information Services client (IS client), Information Services Proxy and an 
   Information Services server (IS-Server). Relative positions of client and 
   server, and the interfaces between them may produce different requirements,
   depending on the type of communication.

   Figure 1 presents a  reference model for both for single and mutihop
   Communication. The reference model shows both client-server and 
   client-proxy-server models. In the client-server model, an IS client
   is communicating with the IS server via an interface Ia which is similar to 
   R1 or R3 as defined in Section 5.3.1 (MIH communication model)[802.21 draft]. 
   In case of client-proxy-server model, the interface Ia` is similar to R4 or 
   R5 in section 5.3.1 [802.21 Draft]. This new IS-Server may reside either 
   within its administrative domain, or in another domain.   



      ------------                 -----------         
      |  IS-client|<-------|------>|IS-Server|   
      ------------    R1/R3        -----------  





      ------------                 -----------                 -----------    
      |  IS-Client|<-------|------>|IS-Proxy | <-----|------> | IS-Server| 
      ------------     R1/R3       -----------     R4/R5       -----------


         Figure 1: Information Service Reference Model and Interfaces 


In order to support the above models, an Information Service system would need to provide more than transport such as, discovery of proxy and Information servers, security association between client-server and client-proxy-server in a variety of deployment scenarios.  However, this document only addresses the transport requirements of information services over IP. Several such scenarios are described below. 


   

3.  Use Cases 

   The models described above for information services allow deployment
   of IS Information Servers anywhere within the visited or home network 
   domain. In this section example scenarios are described indicating where
   information services are likely to be deployed.  Descriptions of
   particular characteristics of these deployments are made, especially
   where the deployments place requirements on any information service
   transportation deployed over IP.

   In each of the figures (Figure2, Figure 3 and Figure 4) below, a
   mobile device is currently connected to a particular wireless access network,
   serviced by an Access Point.  In order to gain information about
   other wireless cells (homogeneous or heterogeneous) in the vicinity, 
   it contacts an information server within the fixed network.

   In Figure 2, the information service has been deployed on a wireless
   Access Point.  This is considered to be a likely scenario, as
   wireless devices themselves may be aware of local information and also 
   may have information about administratively adjacent devices
   (such as first-hop routers) and other access points or base stations within
   the same subnet.

   In this scenario, transport of information services over IP may not
   strictly necessary, as the IS-Server may be the MAC peer of the wireless
   host.  On the other hand if information server is an  IP peer, higher 
   transport is required.



                                                  /--------\
                                                 /          \
   -------        --------     --------    /----/            \----\
   |IS    |       |      |--+--|      |---/                        \
   |Client|<----->|IS    |  |  |      |  /                          \
   |      |       |Server|  |  |      |  \                          /
   -------        --------  |  --------   \                        /
   Host            Access   |   Router     \----\            /----/
                   Point    |                    \          /
                            |  --------         / \--------/
                            +--|      |        /    Core
                               |      |-------/    Network
                               |      |
                               --------
                                Router


                    Figure 2: IS-Server on Access Point

   
   
   Figure 3 shows another scenario whereby the IS-server is co-located in the 
   router.  There the router has access to the upper layer information required
   assisting handovers.

  

                                                  /----------\
                                                 /             \
   --------         --------     --------    /--/                \---\
   |IS     |        |      |--+--|      |---/                         \
   |Client |<-----------------|->| IS   |  /                           \
   |       |        |      |  |  |Server|  \                           /
   ---------        --------  |  --------   \                         /
   Host            Access     |   Router     \----\            /-----/
                   Point      |                    \          /
                              |  --------         / \--------/
                              +--|      |        /    Core
                                 | IS   |-------/    Network
                                 |Server|
                                 --------
                                  Router


                   Figure 3: IS-Server on Subnet Router

   Figures 4 and 5 present the scenarios whereby Information Servers are 
   deployed outside the mobile node's subnet. It presents both advantages 
   and challenges. For example, the server is in a position to serve 
   many access subnets simultaneously, which reduces administrative 
   overheads. Conversely, network support for discovering the IS-Server 
   becomes critically important.  Since a mobile device may roam within 
   a domain though, it may not be necessary to discover the server each 
   time it changes subnet, so long as the mobile remains in the set of 
   networks covered by the server.  For other cases, discovery mechanisms 
   are important, however, it is currently outside the scope of this document. 

   
                                                  /--------\
                                                 /          \
   ------         --------     --------    /----/  --------  \----\
   | IS   |       |      |-----|      |---/        |      |        \
   |Client|<-------------------------------------->|  IS  |         \
   |      |       |      |     |      |  \         |Server|         /
   -------\       --------     --------   \        --------        /
   Host    \        Access       Router     \----\            /----/
            \       Point                       / \          /
             \   --------     --------         /   \--------/
              \  |      |-----|      |        /      Core 
               \ |      |     |      |-------/      Network
                \|      |     |      |
                 --------     --------
                   Access       Router
                   Point
                            Visited Network 

                      Figure 3: IS-Server In the Network  







                                                  /--------\
                                                 /          \
   -----          --------     --------    /----/            \----\
   | IS   |       |      |-----|      |---/        | ---- |        \
   |Client|<---------------------------------------> IS   |         \
   |      |       |      |     |      |  \         |Server|         /
   -----          --------     --------   \        --------        /
   Host \           Access       Router    \----\            /----/
         \          Point                        \          /
          \                                       \--------/
           \                                          |  Core 
            \                                         |  Network
             \                                        |
              \                                       |
               \                                 /--------\
                \                               /          \
                 \--------     --------    /---/            \----\
                  |      |-----|      |---/       |-------|       \ 
                  |      |     |      |           |  IS   |        \
                  |      |     |      |---\       | Server|        /
                  --------     --------    \      | Server|       /
                   Access       Router      \---\           /----/
                   Point                         \         / 
                                                  \-------/
                             
                             Visited Network         Core  
                                                    Network             

                      Figure 4: IS-Server In the Network 


   
   

3.1  Transport-Layer Issues

   The existing ready use of IETF developed transport layer protocols is
   a compelling reason to develop information services transported over
   IP.  Particularly, it is valuable to determine if IS requirements
   match existing transport models and protocols. 

   While higher layer information services are non-real time, in some 
   scenarios (IS-Server within a subnet), the lifetimes of communications 
   with a particular server may be too short.  As such, the sequenced delivery 
   of packets using TCP may be too complicated for this application heavy
   handed [2].  TCP fast recovery relies upon delivery of additional
   packets to stimulate additional transmissions of acknowledgements
   from a receiver back to a transmitter.  Where packet exchanges are
   short and sporadic, loss of a packet may not be detected except using
   long retransmission timeouts [xx]. 



3.2 Information Service Discovery Issues 

   Discovery by the mobile device of the IS-Server either requires
   Information Server participation in a discovery protocol, network
   entity discovery support or use of a directory service.  The
   directory service can then refer mobiles to an appropriate server for
   their location.
	
   Discovery mechanisms need to provide IP layer contact information for
   the IS-Server.  Such a discovery system should provide protection
   against spoofing, to prevent attackers substituting bogus information
   servers.

   In IP networks, numerous directory and configuration services already
   exist.  Use of these services either requires support from locally
   discoverable resources within the same IP hop [xx], or rely on
   prior configuration of the unicast address of the directory service
   [xx].  Prior configuration itself may be performed dynamically, along 
   with other host services [4][15].

   Network entity discovery, such as Router Discovery [9] could allow
   discovery of an IS server during routing configuration operations.
   If server discovery can be achieved through existing configuration
   discovery procedures, no additional packet exchanges would be
   required to perform discovery.  

   As mentioned earlier, discovery of IS server is outside the scope of 
   this document and therefore no requirements on discovery will be 
   discussed. 


3.3 Reliability Issues

   Reliability of IS message exchanges is important and should be supported. 
   For example, if the messages exchanged for the information service
   are assumed to be processed in-order for particular exchanges,
   reordering of packets over the Internet may cause problems for IS
   function.  In that case, transport-layer reliability services may be
   required.

   Alternatively, where message sequence numbers are incorporated into
   the Information Service messages, ordering of packets may be possible
   using application-layer information.  In this case, it may also be
   possible to provide message reliability, on top of a datagram
   oriented transport service.

   Therefore, reliability may be assumed to be supported either by 
   the IS protocol or by the user application.  


3.4 Congestion Control Issues 

Transport protocol like TCP has congestion control mechanism and therefore in such cases this is a non issue. Where existing transport protocols do not incorporate their own congestion control and rate limitation, basic mechanisms for network protection and congestion recovery may need to be added to the IS application protocols. 


 


3.5 Security Issues 
     
     Security is important in IP networks, since there is a danger that
   attacking devices can attempt to adopt roles as information service
   devices.  Such bogus devices could cause service degradation through
   spurious message exchanges, or by providing false information to
   mobile devices.

   IS-Servers need both to protect themselves from attack, and to
   provide mobile clients provable trust, in order that they can 
   exchange the information securely and make their  handover 
   decisions without fear of malicious inaccuracies or mischief. 

    

4. Requirements for Transport over IP

Following are the very high level requirements for IS transport over IP and above layers. 

4.1 The IS transport MUST work both for IPv4 and IPv6 networks 
    
The choice of transport mechanism should work with both IPv4 and IPv6 networks.


4.2 The IS protocol requires that security MUST be provided at the transport layer 

The MIIS message exchanges are critical to handover decision process. Therefore it has to be trusted. However, IS protocol framework does not add security at every message level. Thus it relies upon the underlying security. In such cases, the transport mechanism MUST support the necessary security. 

      4.2.1 The IS transport MUST provide peer authentication  

      4.2.2 The IS transport MUST provide message authentication and may provide confidentiality  

      4.2.3 The IS transport MUST provide replay protection 
 

4.3 The IS transport MUST support the NAT traversal 

The transport protocol should allow the communication between MIHFs if they are behind the NAT box. 

4.4 The IS transport MUST  support the firewall traversal

The transport protocol should allow the communication between MIHFs if they are behind the firewall. 


4.5 Changes to the header fields, IEs and structure messages should not affect the security mechanisms defined for underlying transmission.

MIIS defines the IE and MIH protocol formats that are processed by only MIHF peer entities. Any changes to these formats and fields MUST not require modifying the underlying security mechanisms in future.   






   5. Security Considerations



   
   
6. Acknowledgement