Automotive Industry Requirements for NEMO Route Optimization

1
Automotive Industry Requirements for NEMO Route
Optimization

• IETF71, MEXT WG 12/03/2008
• draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-00
• Roberto Baldessari
• Thierry Ernst
• Andreas Festag
• Massimiliano Lenardi

2
Background

• Several automotive projects and consortia are
  looking at NEMO for deployment of vehicular
  networks
• ISO CALM and ETSI TC ITS to request liasons with
  IETF
• Draft initiated by C2C-CC, now gathering input
  from ISO and ETSI too
• Deployments already presented in past meetings
  (see MEXT interim meeting 7/02/2008)
• here focusing only on the requirements

3
RO Scenarios

• Highest priority to non-nested NEMO RO case
• NEMO MR runs on automotive On-board Units (OBU),
  embedded into cars electronics
• CE classification
• Another vehicle
• Dedicated node in the infrastructure
• On the roadside (topologically close to MR)
• In the Internet
• Arbitrary node in the Internet

4
Req 1 Separability

• Switching to RO is subject to policy table
• Policies include MNP and end points addresses
• Policies may change dynamically (affecting
  establishment of new RO sessions)
• Rationales
• avoiding unnecessary RO sessions
• RO establishment not always worth (external
  information used to set the policies)
• privacy protection

5
Req 2 Security

• As a minimum security feature, MNP ownership
  should be checked against off-path attackers
• I.e. if more sophisticated protection is not
  applicable, a RR-like procedure is minimum req
• Req to be extended for better protection -gt
  feedback is needed
• Automotive MRs likely to be equipped with
  certificates based on PKI (to be harmonized among
  different consortia)
• Given that, the req could include
• authentication of RO signaling
• verification of ownership based on the
  certificate

6
Req 3 Privacy Protection

• Exposing the MNP must be limited to
• CE (obviously)
• nodes on the path MR-CE
• Better protection desirable -gt feedback is needed
• If PKI in place, existing IPsec techniques should
  be applicable to MR-CE

7
Req 4 Multihoming

• RO technique must not prevent different NEMO
  multihoming configurations from working (RFC
  4980)
• (1,n,n) different purpose MNPs/HAs
• (n,1,1) additional MR added in later stage
• (n,n,n) combination of the previous

8
Req 5 Efficient Signaling

• Signaling for establishment of RO as small as
  possible
• Text in the draft outdated
• we want to remove maximum number of signaling
  messages and keep the req generic
• Criterion to choose among different RO solutions

9
Req 6 Switching HA

• HA switch considered in ISO CALM, not in C2C-CC
• RO should not prevent it from working
• Details not yet available
• To be provided in next version