Approaches to Distributed mobility management using Mobile IPv6 and its extensions
draft-patil-mext-dmm-approaches-02
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Basavaraj Patil , Carl Williams , Jouni Korhonen | ||
| Last updated | 2012-05-03 (Latest revision 2011-10-31) | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
Mobility solutions at the IP layer have been specified in the IETF for IPv4 and IPv6. These solutions include host and network based mobility. All of the mobility protocols enable IP session continuity by providing the mobile host with an IP address or prefix that remains constant even as the host moves and attaches to different access networks and points of attachment. Mobile hosts are anchored at a gateway via a tunnel and the address/prefix provided to the host via the gateway remains unchanged across mobility events. All IP sessions initiated or terminated at a mobile host are anchored via the gateway. A gateway centric approach raises certain concerns in terms of cost and efficiency. A mobility model wherein the mobility functions are distributed is a way of alleviating the concerns of a gateway centric approach. This document considers ways to alleviate anchored mobility issues with approaches that could be considered in a deployment.
Authors
Basavaraj Patil
Carl Williams
Jouni Korhonen
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)