Virtual network interface for multiple interfaces in a mobile node using Mobile IPv6 draft-hong-multipleif-mn-pb-statement-00.txt draft-hong-virtualif-mn-mipv6-00.txt

1
Virtual network interface for multiple
interfaces in a mobile node using Mobile
IPv6draft-hong-multipleif-mn-pb-statement-00.txt
draft-hong-virtualif-mn-mipv6-00.txt

• Y-G Hong, J-C Lee, J-S Park, H-J Kim
  
  
• ETRI
• IETF-64 monami6 Meeting _at_Vancouver

2
Goals of these drafts

• Identify some problems of multiple interfaces in
  a MN or MR
• Mobile IPv6-specific issues
• General network issues
• Consideration for Heterogeneous Environments
• Propose a virtual network interface model for
  multiple interfaces in a MN or MR

3
Problem Statements

• Mobile IPv6 Specific Issues
• Determination of network movement
• Receiving RA message from different interfaces
• General Network Issues
• Updating the relation between a destination
  address and a network interface
• Consideration for Heterogeneous Environments
• Using Mobile IPv6 and NEMO in IPv4 based network

4
Issues in monami6 ML for Problem Statements (1/3)

• For Mobile IPv6 Specific Issues
• About MIPL, the current code has some parts
  related to interface preference mechanisms
  (10/25, by Romain)
• The problem statement sticks too much to
  implementation issues, not to generic issues
  related to multihoming. (10/25, by Romain)
• The problem you describe in your draft is an
  implementation specific issue, as pointed out by
  Romain Kuntz. In draft-montavont, we have a
  section "considerations for MIP6 implementation".
  So, at best some text could be added there.
  (10/26, by Thierry)
• Using RA reception to determine a movement or
  even to determine the availibility/unavailibility
  of an interface is an information that we want to
  consider in general. Note that in our revision,
  we changed media detection to failure detection,
  in order to consider all failure that can occur
  on the entire path between the MN and its CN. It
  can be on the media (interface connected or not
  at L2, or no IPv6 prefix on the link), or a
  failure on the path between the MN and the HA, or
  between the HA and the CN. So, for me, RA
  reception is part of failure detection. We may
  have to add text to explicitly mention that it is
  considered. Anyway, I think we have lot of work
  to clarify failure detection.(10/28, by Nicolas)

5
Issues in monami6 ML for Problem Statements (2/3)

• For General Network Issues
• The problem yoiu describe in your draft is
  related, when considering a mobile node, to the
  HoA address, and you ranged it into a "generic
  issue" because it can apply to a fixed node with
  multiple interfaces, right? I think this is a
  problem in which SHIM6 is qualified (how to
  change the locator, but not the identifier). I
  agree that our text in draft-montavont should be
  improved in a fashion similar to
  draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues where such
  issues are well described. (10/26 by Thierry)
• Even though this problem that end node should
  update the relation between destination address
  and specific network interface to prevent
  dissonance between active network interface and
  changed IP address was happened in fixed end
  node, I do not agree that the SHIM6 should
  qualify this problem. AFAIK, SHIM6 is considering
  environment where an end node has multiple paths
  (multiple IPv6 address prefix) by connecting to
  different ISP that means site multihoming. So
  site multihomed an end node does not have
  necessarily multiple interfaces and it only has
  to obtain multiple addresses from different site
  exit routers. But the mobile node equipped
  multiple interfaces are down for discussion in
  MONAMI6 WG clearly. Therefore, if we have
  consensus, which this problem must be solved for
  using multiple interfaces, I think that the
  MONAMI6 is more suitable place than SHIM6. (10/27
  By Taewan You)

6
Issues in monami6 ML for Problem Statements (3/3)

• For Heterogeneous Environments Issues
• About Heterogeneous Environments, you speak about
  v4-only access on CDMA interface. I believe you
  never roam on the CDMA interface, so a tunneling
  system would fit to your problem (l2tp, or DTCP).
  If not you may take a look at draft-ietf-mip6-nemo
  -v4traversal-00.txt (10/25 by Romain)
• The concern described in your draft is valid and
  is addressed in draft-ietf-mip6-nemo-v4traversal-0
  0.txt. Note that I do not consider it has a
  multihoming issues at all it is right that nodes
  equipped with multiple interfaces may be more
  concerned with this issue, but this could also
  happen for a node with a single interface (for
  instance, a node with a WI-FI interface roaming
  between an IPv6 wireless LAN and an IPv4 wireless
  LAN. We already came across this problem (10/26
  By Thierry)

7
Issues in monami6 ML for Problem Statements

• For general Issues
• Actually, I kind of agree that more text could be
  useful in draft-montavont., in the same fashion
  as in draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues under
  the issue "Media Detection". However, I think we
  disagree on the classification as I wouldn't
  consider it as a MIP6-specific issue.(10/26 by
  Thierry)

8
Architecture of virtual I/F model
9
Operations of virtual I/F model

• When a Mobile IPv6/NEMO starts
• Virtual interface is configured to send/receive
  packets
• Path between one real network interface and
  virtual interface is made
• When sending packets
• Virtual interface -gt Real network interface
• When receiving packets
• Real network interface -gt Virtual interface

10
Issues in monami6 ML for Virtual Interface model

• The virtual interface model is a good idea when
  you plan to use several interfaces, but not at
  the same time. What if you want to use several
  interfaces at the same time? (10/25, by Romain)
• To use multiple interfaces simultaneously, you
  have to register the CoA of each interface to the
  Home Agent(s) (ie send several BUs), handle
  policies for each interface etc. You may also
  have events on several interfaces at the same
  time. How can you handle this with the virtual
  interface model? (10/27, by Romain)
• I was speaking about several "physical interface"
  that you want to use _simultaneously_, ie for
  example by registering the CoA of _each_
  interface (as proposed in draft-wakikawa-mobileip-
  multiplecoa for example). I am not sure how you
  can deal with that with only one virtual
  interface. (10/28, by Romain)

11
Next Steps ?

• Our Problem Statements can be added into some
  related documents and we can improve Nicolass
  document
• Virtual Interface model can be one solution to
  handle multiple interface node without modifying
  Mobile IPv6 and NEMO
• If there is some consensus, we would like to
  improve the virtual interface document
• Hopefully part of this WG