1. 1 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 Three Areas of Interest that would repay attention GENI security infrastructure vis-à-vis mobility mgmt Accurate, reliable simulation facilities Low-power routing for mesh/ad-hoc network Charles E. Perkins Nokia Siemens Networks GENI Wireless Workshop July 31-August1 2007

2. 2 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 Is scalable security possible? In IETF, Mobile IPv6 had requirement to build a security solution for ?trillions? of “correspondent nodes” Given and well-understood: mobility management requires security Mobile IPv6 infrastructure is distributed and easily addressable collection of trusted agents A unique property! Authorization for services could be derived from: trust in routing, plus server authorizations mediated via home agent

3. 3 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 Observations + 1 question Home agent can be equipped to retrieve authorizations  identity only checked in home domain If distributed identity mgmt is unscalable, it’s infeasible as basis http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2006/HPL-2006-3.html (Alan Karp)http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2006/HPL-2006-3.html Possessing an authorization can preserve anonymity (capabilities) Do people want all authorizations to be local?

4. 4 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 How to proceed Define authorizations (certificates?) naming? (map to IPv6 addresses??) Delegation home agent  home policy Map out protocols with mobile device: How to obtain authorizations How to presents authorizations to services Interactions to operator HLR, Radius, Diameter, …

5. 5 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 Living on quicksand Many simulators to choose from, but are they trustworthy? Experiment comparing Opnet, Qualnet, NS-2 not at all encouraging IETF experience [more later] Problem: work in this area is said to be not publishable What about NS-3?

6. 6 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 Low-power mesh and ad-hoc networking Great for sensor nets, Wireless Africa, billions of wireless handsets How to reduce power consumption Reduced packet size Reduce number of packets Let mesh points and mobile devices go to sleep IETF/IEEE protocols – what do we know? This is important, if standards provide basis for future devices! Little trustworthy comparison available by way of simulation On-demand vs. proactive; link-state vs. distance-vector Customers and vendors want one protocol, not two How can they decide? Who knows?!

7. 7 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 Our Recent Results Our thesis: sparse traffic favors on-demand, heavy traffic favors proactive Observation: more topology data becomes relevant, and periodic advertisement could then be more efficient on-demand procedures But, we are showing on-demand distance vector almost always wins Higher PDR Fewer messages transmitted (i.e., low power) Important: fair comparison! (but it is not so easy) Adjust advertisement intervals to be comparable (OLSR topology control vs. SMURF neighborhood advertisements vs. AODV’s HELLO messages) Run both on reduced relay set (MPR or CDS) Is this work publishable? Aren’t OLSR and AODV are old news…(?!)

8. 8 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07

9. 9 © 2007 NokiaSiemensNetworks Low-Power Mesh-Slides / 2007-20-07 Other directions RREQ as a typically unicast message Or, was that multicast? What is the value of path accumulation? Interactions between Internet Gateways and pulsars and [manet] protocols