NEMO Working Group C. Ng
Internet-Draft J. Hirano
Expires: May 21, 2008 Panasonic
A. Petrescu
Motorola
E. Paik
KT
November 18, 2007
Consumer Electronics Requirements for Network Mobility Route
Optimization
draft-ng-nemo-ce-req-01
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 May 21, 2008.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract
This document illustrates different deployments of Network Mobility
(NEMO) from the consumer electronics perspective. From these
deployments, a set of requirements is deduced for Route Optimization
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
(RO) with NEMO.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Deployments of Personal Mobile Router . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Simple Personal Area Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Personal Mobile Router in a Car . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3. Residence Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3. Consumer Electronics Requirements for Route Optimization . . . 9
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.1. Normative Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.2. Informative Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 15
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
1. Introduction
Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support [3] allows a whole network to
change its point of attachment while maintaining reachability and
session continuity. [4] and [5] investigate the inefficiencies in
NEMO Basic Support, and analyze the solution space for Route
Optimization (RO) with NEMO from a technical perspective.
This document explores the different deployment scenarios of NEMO
from the perspective of consumer electronics. This mainly entails a
personal device, called the Personal Mobile Router, as the primary
node which a user utilizes to allow the user's other devices to
communicate with other nodes in the global Internet. This is
detailed in Section 2. From these deployments, a set of requirements
is inferred in Section 3.
It is expected for readers to be familiar with terminologies related
to mobility in [1] and NEMO related terms defined in [2]. Interested
readers may also refer to [6] and [7] for the requirements from the
automobile and aviation industries respectively.
2. Deployments of Personal Mobile Router
The Personal Mobile Router is generally envisaged as a mobile
communications device, most probably a cellular handphone, with
embedded router functionality so as to allow other personal devices
(such as MP3 Players, Digital Cameras) to access the global Internet.
In such a deployment, it is expected for the Personal Mobile Router
to provide all the routing capabilities of the personal area network.
This means that one would generally not expect devices (i.e. LFNs)
such as digital camera or music players to have routing capabilities.
In other words, LFNs are envisaged as simple IPv6 hosts.
However, it is possible for there to be a Local Mobile Node (MNN) in
the personal area network. For instance, a laptop or a WLAN-enabled
PDA can break off from the personal area network and connect to the
Internet on its own. Thus, the device becomes a MIPv6 host, with its
home address configured from the Mobile Network Prefix of the
personal area network.
This section illustrates three different deployment scenarios with
respect to the Personal Mobile Router. First is a simple personal
area network where NEMO services is provided by a service provider
(such as an telecommunications operator). Next is the deployment
where the Personal Mobile Router is docked within a car and serves as
an additional Mobile Router for the car network. The last scenario
is the case where the Personal Mobile Router obtains a network prefix
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
not directly from its Internet service providers. Instead, the
network prefix is allocated from the user's residence.
2.1. Simple Personal Area Network
The simplest deployment is when the Personal Mobile Router is simply
used to provide Internet access to other devices in a user's personal
area network. This is the case where the user subscribes to a
mobility service provider that allocates a network prefix for the
user's personal area network. One example of this is the 3GPP
Personal Network Management services [8].
For this scenario, typical communications will be audio/video
streaming from a multimedia content server to the music/video player
in the user's personal area network. This is a case of
communications between a LFN with a CN in the global internet.
---------- ----
+-----------------| Internet |----| CN |
| ---------- ----
----------------
|Mobility Service|
| Provider |
----------------
|
/ | 3GPP
| --------
| | laptop | (MR)
| --------
PAN < |
(NEMO) | | wifi
| -------
| | PDA | (LFN)
\ -------
Figure 1: Simple PAN deployment
An alternative situation will be communications between devices from
two (or more) different personal area networks. For example, two
different users may engage in a game with their personal
entertainment devices (such as Nintendo or Play Station portables),
or share their audio files stored in their music players. This is a
case of communications between two LFNs from different NEMO.
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
------------------
| Mobility Service |
| Provider (*) |
/ ------------------ \
/ \
| |
| 3GPP | 3GPP
-------- --------
| laptop | (MR) | laptop | (MR)
-------- --------
| |
| Wired | wifi
| |
-------- --------
|Nintendo| (LFN) |Nintendo| (LFN)
-------- --------
(*) - The two MRs may subscribe to the same or different Mobility
Service Provider(s)
Figure 2: Comunications between Two LFNs
An interesting scenario of a Personal Area Network that is beginning
to emerge is where the Personal Area Network is composed of a
Personal Mobile Router and wearable sensors. Typical deployment [9]
would be for a patient who wears wearable sensors that monitor his/
her physical conditions (eg., heartbeat, body temperature, blood
pressure, etc) periodically and transmit the measurement to a
hospital server through the Personal Mobile Router. This is a case
of communications between LFNs and a CN wherein the main traffic from
the LFN to the CN.
---------- ----------
+--------| Internet |----| Hospital | (CN)
| ---------- ----------
| GPRS
------------
| Cell Phone | (MR)
------------
|
+-----------+------------+
| Bluetooth |
---------- ---------------
(LFN) | Finger | | Earphone Body | (LFN)
| Oximeter | | Thermometer |
---------- ---------------
Figure 3: Wearable Sensors Network for Medical Monitoring
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
A more complex use case for Personal Area Network can be described as
a dynamic change (scenario) between two different Personal Area
Network situations having the same entities. Each entity dynamically
changes its role (from, for example, MR to LFN), and, more
importantly, the routing task is moved from one entity to another.
Consider a Personal Area Network built from one PDA and one laptop.
In the first situation, the laptop is the Mobile Router. It uses its
WiMax interface to connect to the Internet and its WiFi interface to
offer access to the PDA. Following this, a second situation is
formed where the PDA connects its 3G interface to the Internet
(becoming the Mobile Router) and gives access to the laptop over
WiFi. This is illustrated in Figure 4 below.
^ to Internet
|
| WiMax
-------- --------
| laptop | (MR) | laptop | (LFN)
-------- \ --------
| -----\ |
| wifi -----/ | wifi
| / |
------- -------
| PDA | (LFN) | PDA | (MR)
------- -------
| 3GPP
|
+-------> to Internet
Figure 4: Switching of Roles in PAN
Both these situations can exist independently, as there are existing
software that is currently supporting these. For example, both
Microsoft Windows XP (laptop) and Windows Mobile (PDA) have the
ability to connect one interface to Internet and offer access over
the other interface.
However, the automatic change between these two situations is not
possible without user intervention. The issues around this relate to
interface configuration, default route configuration and others. If
Mobile IP is used then there are additional issues with respect to
pre-established behavior (eg. use or do not use tunnels).
An example application where this support is needed is described
next. The scenario above describes the movement of the main routing
task from the laptop to the PDA. The routing task (run Mobile IP and
NEMO, and hide the LFN from mobility events) can be very consuming
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
and can compete with user interface events. For example, a user of a
laptop and PDA sets up the laptop as MR and PDA as LFN. The user
continues editing a document on the laptop. Then, another user
arrives with a laptop and needs access. At this point the first user
is actually interested in making the PDA to be MR (and not his/her
laptop) thus avoiding being disturbed by the more consuming routing
task of laptop (routing for two users is doubled).
Depending on the communicating applications, these kinds of scenarios
needing dynamic change of role of the entity performing the routing
task can be very numerous.
2.2. Personal Mobile Router in a Car
A second scenario involving the Personal Mobile Router is when the
user docks the Personal Mobile Router into a car network. This
allows the communications devices in the vehicle to use the Personal
Mobile Router to access information from the Internet. It also
allows the personal devices in the personal area network to use the
Mobile Router in the vehicle network to communicate with
correspondent nodes on the Internet. In other words, the two mobile
networks (personal area network and vehicle network) merges to form a
multihomed network.
There are two possible configurations that could arise. The first
possible configuration is where the car sensors and automotive
devices are connected to Car Mobile Router using a wired medium (such
as the Controller Area Network, etc), and the personal devices are
connected to the Personal Mobile Router using a wireless medium (such
as the Bluetooth or Ultra Wide Band). The Personal Mobile Router is
connected to the Car Mobile Router via a docking mechanism installed
in the car. This is illustrated in Figure 5 below.
WiMAX 3G
Car Sensors | | Personal Devices
& Automobile Devices | | (Eg. iPod, PSP, Lumix)
_ _ | | _ _
|_| |_| -------- -------- |_| |_|
| | | Car | |Personal| | |
--+--+----+--+---| Mobile |======| Mobile |-----+--+--+--
_ | _ | | Router | Dock | Router | _ |
|_|--+ |_|--+ -------- -------- |_|--+
<----- CAR NEMO -----> <------- PAN ------>
Figure 5: Separate Links in Merged NEMO
In such a merged network, the vehicle network devices and the
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
personal area network devices will continue to use their own original
network prefixes to communicate with external nodes. Hence, one way
to view this is to treat it as if the two Mobile Routers attaches to
each other, and uses each other as an additional access router. This
implies that the a communication between a MNN and a correspondent
node may go through two Mobile Routers (e.g. the communication from
the car navigation device to a traffic condition server passes
through first the Mobile Router of the car, and then the Personal
Mobile Router). Hence, this can be viewed as a case of a nested
NEMO.
A second possibility is that the car network and the personal area
network fused into a single network with two mobile routers. One way
this can happen is when the two networks use the same wireless
technology such as Bluetooth or Wireless Universal Serial Bus as the
interconnection medium. This is shown in Figure 6 below. This is a
typical NEMO with multiple mobile routers and prefixes [10]. The car
devices are free to configure an address from the Mobile Network
Prefix of the Personal Mobile Router to communicate with other
correspondent nodes in the Internet (such as a realtime traffic
monitoring server). Similarly, the personal devices are free to
configure an address from the Mobile Network Prefix of the Car Mobile
Router to communicate with other correspondent nodes in the Internet
(such as a You-Tube video server).
WiMAX 3G
| |
-------- --------
| Car | |Personal|
| Mobile | | Mobile |
| Router | | Router |
_ _ -------- -------- _ _
|_| |_| | | |_| |_|
| | | | | |
--+--+----+--+---+---------------+-------+--+--+--
_ | _ | _ |
|_|--+ |_|--+ |_|--+
Car Sensors Personal Devices
& Automobile Devices (Eg. iPod, PSP, Lumix)
<------- Merged Into a Single NEMO --------->
Figure 6: A Single Link in Merged NEMO
When the car network and the personal area network fused into a
single network, LFNs in this single network can communicate with each
other. For example, a sensor which was a LFN of the personal area
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
network senses the body temperature of the driver and send this
information to the activator which was a LFN of the car network to
make the car environment comfortable for the driver. Since the car
network and the personal area network became a single network, this
communication is a case of intra-NEMO communication.
2.3. Residence Home Network
This scenario is a special deployment as it differs from the usual
subscription model that is more commonly used. Basically, in this
scenario, the home network of the Personal Mobile Router (as far as
NEMO is concerned) is literally the "home" -- i.e. the residence of
the user. It is envisioned that the user deploys a residence-wide
network with a set-top box serving as the gateway. This set-top box
is connected to the Internet via broadband connection (cable or ADSL)
and obtains an IPv6 prefix from the ISP. Part of the IPv6 prefix
obtained is then assigned as the prefix for the user's personal are
network (i.e. the Mobile Network Prefix for the personal area
network). The set-top box is thus configured as the home agent of
the Personal Mobile Router.
Typically, the devices in the personal area network (i.e. LFNs)
would communicate mostly with other devices in the residence network
(e.g. personal video player accessing movie stored in a digital video
recorder in the residence). In such situation, route optimization is
redundant. However, there exist situations where multiple personal
area networks (each belonging to different family members) belong to
the same residence network. Devices from these different personal
area networks may communicate with each other often enough. In the
latter situation, it is a case of two MNNs from different NEMO
communicating with each other.
3. Consumer Electronics Requirements for Route Optimization
Not all communications involving personal area network require route
optimization. There are, however, two particular use cases where
route optimization is highly preferable. The first use case is when
devices in a personal area network are used for real time interactive
applications which are sensitive to round trip delays. Examples
include voice-over-IP communications and multiplayer gaming sessions.
This usually entails communications between two devices from two
different personal area network, as illustrated in Section 2.1 and
Section 2.3. In such cases, there might be two different home agents
involved (one for each NEMO), hence making the improvement in delay
reduction of route optimization more significant. The second use
case is when the home network is congested, or otherwise bandwidth-
limited. One example is the residence home network as described in
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
Section 2.3. Most broadband residence access are asymmetrical (i.e.
the uplink bandwidth is much smaller than the downlink bandwidth),
making it unsuitable for the home agent (e.g. set-top box) to forward
large amount of packets to Personal Mobile Routers.
Where route optimization is highly preferable, we can infer the
following requirements (denoted by "Req") and desirable features
(denoted by "Des") from the deployment scenarios described in
Section 2.
o Req1: Unmodified LFNs
A route optimization solution MUST operate even when LFNs are
unmodified
Rationale:
Devices in the personal area network are envisaged as simple
IPv6 node. The Personal Mobile Router is expected to provide
route optimization services for any consumer electronic devices
that connect to its personal area network. Thus, it is
expected for LFNs to remain unmodified and unaware of mobile
network's movement for route optimizations.
o Req2: Low Processing Load
A route optimization solution MUST NOT increase the processing
load of the MR significantly
Rationale:
The Personal Mobile Router is a small mobile device (e.g.
handphone) that is limited in battery power. Hence, any route
optimization solution should not significantly increases the
processing load of the MR.
o Req3: Security
A route optimization solution MUST NOT expose the mobile
network to additional security risk
Rationale:
Security is a prime consideration in the deployment of Personal
Mobile Router, since the personal area network may store
private information. In general, a personal area network would
not allow external devices to attach to the mobile network,
hence the Personal Mobile Router will the most important
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
gateway in which security of the personal area network is
enforced. As such, any route optimization solution should not
expose the Personal Mobile Router to additional risk as
compared to NEMO Basic Support.
Particularly, it must not be possible for other nodes to claim
ownership of the Mobile Network Prefix (in entirety or in
parts). Additionally, denial-of service attacks on the
Personal Mobile Router (e.g. by forcing the Personal Mobile
Router to send a huge amount of signaling packets or to
maintain a large number of signaling states) must not be
possible.
o Des1: MR-to-MR Route Optimization
As seen in Section 2, most of the communications we envisaged are
in the form of a MNN communicating with another MNN in different
personal area networks. As we do not expect MNNs to be involved
in route optimization signaling, a suitable route optimization
would likely be between the two MRs. This way, correspondent
nodes would not be impacted.
o Des2: Nested-NEMO Route Optimization
In Section 2.2, a scenario is illustrated where the Personal
Mobile Router is attaching to the car mobile router for Internet
access (and vice versa). If the car mobile router performs route
optimization for its network, then the Personal Mobile Router can
run a separate route optimization session to achieve fully-
optimized route. Alternatively, it is also possible for the
Personal Mobile Router to support some mechanism that achieve
nested-NEMO route optimization.
o Des3: Intra-NEMO Route Optimization
In Section 2.2, a scenario is illustrated where nodes in a the car
network and nodes in the personal area network communicates with
each other. It is desirable that any route optimization solution
would work for intra-NEMO communications as well. It will be even
preferable if such intra-NEMO route optimizations can be achieved
without sending signalling messages out of the mobile network.
4. IANA Considerations
This is an informational document and does not require any IANA
action.
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
5. Security Considerations
Security is a prime consideration in the deployment of Personal
Mobile Router. The requirements for security involving the Personal
Mobile Router are discussed in Section 3.
6. References
6.1. Normative Reference
[1] Manner, J. and M. Kojo, "Mobility Related Terminology",
RFC 3753, June 2004.
[2] Ernst, T. and H-Y. Lach, "Network Mobility Support
Terminology", RFC 4885, July 2007.
6.2. Informative Reference
[3] Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., and P. Thubert,
"Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol", RFC 3963,
January 2005.
[4] Ng, C., Thubert, P., Watari, M., and F. Zhao, "Network Mobility
Route Optimization Problem Statement", RFC 4888, July 2007.
[5] Ng, C., Zhao, F., Watari, M., and P. Thubert, "Network Mobility
Route Optimization Solution Space Analysis", RFC 4889,
July 2007.
[6] Baldessari, R., "C2C-C Consortium Requirements for NEMO Route
Optimization", draft-baldessari-c2ccc-nemo-req-01 (work in
progress), July 2007.
[7] Eddy, W., "NEMO Route Optimization Requirements for Operational
Use in Aeronautics and Space Exploration Mobile Networks",
draft-eddy-nemo-aero-reqs-02 (work in progress), August 2007.
[8] "Service requirements for Personal Network Management (PNM)",
3GPP TS 22.259, June 2006.
[9] Oliver, N. and F. Flores-Mangas, "HealthGear: A Real-time
Wearable System for Monitoring and Analyzing Physiological
Signals", <http://research.microsoft.com/~nuria/healthgear/
noliver-healthgear.pdf>.
[10] Ng, C., Ernst, T., Paik, E., and M. Bagnulo, "Analysis of
Multihoming in Network Mobility Support", RFC 4980,
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
October 2007.
Appendix A. Change Log
o draft-ng-nemo-ro-req-01:
* Expanded Section 2.2 to include different possible
configurations
* New scenarios in Section 2.1 and Section 2.2
* Organized Section 3 to have one-liner requirements, followed by
the explanation to give a more concise presentation
* Added Jun, Eun Kyoung and Alexandru as co-authors
* Various other editorial fixes
o draft-ng-nemo-ro-req-00:
* Initial version.
Authors' Addresses
Chan-Wah Ng
Panasonic Singapore Laboratories Pte Ltd
Blk 1022 Tai Seng Ave #06-3530
Tai Seng Industrial Estate
Singapore 534415
SG
Phone: +65 65505420
Email: chanwah.ng@sg.panasonic.com
Jun Hirano
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (Panasonic)
5-3 Hikarino-oka
Yokosuka, Kanagawa 239-0847
JP
Phone: +81 46 840 5123
Email: hirano.jun@jp.panasonic.com
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
Alexandru Petrescu
Motorola
Parc les Algorithmes Saint Aubin
Gif-sur-Yvette 91193
France
Email: Alexandru.Petrescu@motorola.com
Eun Kyoung Paik
KT
Portable Internet Team, Convergence Lab., KT
17 Woomyeon-dong, Seocho-gu
Seoul 137-792
Korea
Phone: +82-2-526-5233
Fax: +82-2-526-5200
Email: euna@kt.co.kr
URI: http://mmlab.snu.ac.kr/~eun/
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft NEMO CE Requirements November 2007
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Ng, et al. Expires May 21, 2008 [Page 15]