Presentation on theme: "Mobile IPv4 FA CoA Support in WLAN Interworking Raymond Hsu Qualcomm Inc. Notice: QUALCOMM Incorporated grants a free, irrevocable license."— Presentation transcript:
Mobile IPv4 FA CoA Support in WLAN Interworking Raymond Hsu email@example.com Qualcomm Inc. Notice: QUALCOMM Incorporated grants a free, irrevocable license to 3GPP2 and its Organization Partners to incorporate text or other copyrightable material contained in the contribution and any modifications thereof in the creation of 3GPP2 publications; to copyright and sell in Organizational Partner’s name any Organizational Partner’s standards publication even though it may include portions of the contribution; and at the Organization Partner’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part such contributions or the resulting Organizational Partner’s standards publication. QUALCOMM Incorporated is also willing to grant licenses under such contributor copyrights to third parties on reasonable, non-discriminatory terms and conditions for purpose of practicing an Organizational Partner’s standard which incorporates this contribution.This document has been prepared by QUALCOMM Incorporated to assist the development of specifications by 3GPP2. It is proposed to the Committee as a basis for discussion and is not to be construed as a binding proposal on QUALCOMM Incorporated. QUALCOMM Incorporated specifically reserves the right to amend or modify the material contained herein and nothing herein shall be construed as conferring or offering licenses or rights with respect to any intellectual property of QUALCOMM Incorporated other than provided in the copyright statement above.
Recommendation Current baseline: –MS should use CCoA. –FA support in PDIF is optional. Recommendation: –MS may use FA CoA or CCoA. –FA support in PDIF is mandatory.
Why Support FA CoA? Advantages: –Same MS behaviors for both WLAN and 1x, since FA CoA is recommended in 1x for IPv4 mobility If FA is not supported in PDIF, MS moving from 1x to WLAN would have different MS behaviors: –Enable D-bit in RRQ –Perform IP-IP encapsulation/decapsulation –Less transport overhead compared to CCoA No IP-IP encapsulation between MS and HA –Support dynamic HA assignment CCoA requires static HA Disadvantage? –After tunnel establishment, FAC authentication triggers PDIF to contact home RADIUS server. RADIUS traversal for FAC authentication only occurs for the initial registration with the PDIF. RADIUS traversal for FAC authentication is not required for re-registration (sec 220.127.116.11 of TIA-835.2-C) Therefore, it’s a small disadvantage.
How to Support FA CoA? MS establishes end-to-end security with PDIF but is not assigned an IP address from PDIF via IKEv2. –MS indicates that it doesn’t want an IP address by not including the Internal_IPv4_Address attribute in the Configuration Payload (CP) of the IKEv2 message. The absence of the Internal_IPv4_Address attribute triggers PDIF to send unsolicited Agent Advertisements to the MS. –This is similar to the absence of the IP Address Configuration Option (in IPCP), which triggers the PDSN to send Advertisements. MS may send Solicitations if Advertisements are not received. MS performs MIP registration with FA (in PDIF) and HA. –PDIF supports FAC authentication (for initial registration) according to section 4.2.3 of IS-835.2-D.