1. Mobile Networking Mobile-IP Mobile Networking Ad Hoc Network
ACP/WG N Meeting 06 WGN06 – IP13
ACP/WG N/SG N1 WP904
(APC) WP-N1-IP-701
Latest available information as of 03/26/2006
Will Ivancic
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

2. Outline Mobile Networking Solutions Mobile-IPv4 Operation (mip4)
Networks In Motion (nemo)
Mobile Nodes and Multiple Interfaces in IPv6 (monami6)
Ad Hoc Networks
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

3. What is Mobility? Transportable Mobile Telecommuter Traveler
Relatively static once connected
Single point of connection
Connectivity
IPv6 Autoconfiguration
VPN
Mobile
Mobile Devices
PDAs
Cell Phones
Mobile Networks
Trains
Planes
Automobiles
Connectivity
Mobile-IP
Networks in Motion (NEMO)
Ad Hoc Networks
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

4. Mobile Networking Solutions
Routing Protocols
 Route Optimization
 Convergence Time
 Sharing Infrastructure – who owns the network?
Mobile-IP
 Route Optimization
Optimization for MIPv6
No Optimization for NEMOv6 (Basic)
Optimization can be problematic for security (if reverse tunneling is required)
 Convergence Time
 Sharing Infrastructure
 Security – Relatively Easy to Secure
Domain Name Servers
 Reliability
Source – Will Ivancic

5. Mobility at What Layer? Layer-2 (Radio Link) Layer-3 (Network Layer)
Fast and Efficient
Proven Technology within the same infrastructure
Cellular Technology Handoffs
WiFi handoffs
Layer-3 (Network Layer)
Slower Handover between varying networks
Layer-3 IP address provides identity
Security Issues
Need to maintain address
Layer-4 (Transport Layer)
Research Area
Identity not tied to layer-3 IP address
Proposed Solutions
HIP – Host Identity Protocol
SCTP – Stream Control Transport Protocol
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

6. What is the Weather like in Cleveland?
Location Identifier
HQ Keeps Track of Alice.
Hello Bob,
I am in Cleveland, Ohio
I am in
Cleveland, Ohio
Alice
(Mobile Node)
What is the Weather like in Cleveland?
Hello Alice
Internet
Where is Alice’s
Location Manager?
Bob
(Corresponding Node)
Headquarters
(Location Manager)
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

7. Moblile-IP Operation
IPv4
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

8. Mobile IPv4 Header Considerations
Source is always home network address!
Easy to secure due to consistent end-point!
But, results in topologically incorrect address when away from home.
Security Issue, Ingress and Egress Filtering
Reverse Tunneling
Fixes topologically incorrect addressing problem
Eases secure deployment.
IPv4 Header 20 bytes
Version
IHL
Type of Service
Total Length
Identification
Flags
Fragment Offset
Time to Live
Protocol
Header Checksum
Source Address
Destination Address
Options
Padding
IHL is header length,
Fixed length header, 40 bytes
IPV4 What size is the IP header?
Usually 20 bytes without options, maximum is 60 bytes.
V4 Header 20 bytes, V6 header is 40 bytes but the V6 header compresses down much better than the V4 due to fixed header length etc.
What is the max size of an IP v4 datagram? 65535
Addition of ‘Flow Label” Field in IP Header can be used by routers to identify flows for optimal routing. (20 bits)
This part of IPv6 is not standardized yet, and may well change semantics in the future
The Flow Label field indicates that this packet belongs to a specific sequence of packets between a source and destination, requiring special handling by intermediate IPv6 routers. The size of this field is 20 bits. The flow label is used for non-default quality-of-service (QoS) connections, such as those needed by real-time data (voice and video). For default router handling, the Flow Label field is set to 0. There can be multiple flows between a source and destination, as distinguished by separate non-zero flow labels. Like the Traffic Class field, exact details of the Flow Label field's use are not yet defined.
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

9. Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Foreign Agents Bi-directional Tunnel
Mobile Node
“ ”
Home IP
Care-Off-Address
Foreign Agent
Foreign Agent
NASA Glenn
NASA Ames
Internet or Intranet
Bi-directional Tunnel
if Reverse Tunneling
Is specified.
NASA Goddard
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

10. Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Foreign Agents
Mobile Node
“ ”
Home IP
Care-Off-Address
Foreign Agent
Foreign Agent
NASA Glenn
NASA Ames
Internet or Intranet
NASA Goddard
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

11. Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Foreign Agents
(Reverse Tunneling)
Mobile Node
“ ”
Home IP
Care-Off-Address
Foreign Agent
Foreign Agent
NASA Glenn
NASA Ames
Internet or Intranet
NASA Goddard
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

12. Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Collocated Care-Of-Address
DHCP or
Connection Established
Mobile Node
“ ”
Home IP
Care-Off-Address
Access Router
Access Router
NASA Glenn
NASA Ames
Internet or Intranet
Bi-directional Tunnel
if Reverse Tunneling
Is specified.
NASA Goddard
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

13. Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Collocated Care-Of-Address
Mobile Node
“ ”
Home IP
Care-Off-Address
Access Router
Access Router
NASA Glenn
NASA Ames
Internet or Intranet
NASA Goddard
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

14. Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Collocated Care-Of-Address
(Reverse Tunneling)
Mobile Node
“ ”
Home IP
Care-Off-Address
Access Router
Access Router
NASA Glenn
NASA Ames
Internet or Intranet
NASA Goddard
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

15. Bi-directional Tunnel
Mobile-Router (IPv4)
Mobile Router
Virtual LAN
Interface
Mobile Router
(Mobile Node)
Roaming
Interface
Bi-directional Tunnel
if Reverse Tunneling
Is specified.
Tunnel-0
MR Loopback
Virtual Interface
COA
FA WAN
Tunnel-1
Foreign Agent
Internet WAN
Internet
Internet WAN
Home Agent
HA Loopback
Virtual Interface
Corresponding Node
Source – Will Ivancic

16. Mobile-Router (IPv4) Mobile Router (Reverse Tunneling)
Virtual LAN
Interface
Mobile Router
(Mobile Node)
Roaming
Interface
Tunnel-0
MR Loopback
Virtual Interface
COA
FA WAN
Tunnel-1
Foreign Agent
Internet WAN
Internet
Internet WAN
Home Agent
HA Loopback
Virtual Interface
Corresponding Node
Source – Will Ivancic

17. Collocated Care-Of-Address
Mobile-Router (IPv4)
Collocated Care-Of-Address
Virtual LAN
Interface
Mobile Router
(Mobile Node)
Roaming
Interface
Tunnel-0
MR Loopback
Virtual Interface
COA
FA WAN
No Foreign Agent
No Second Tunnel
Foreign Agent
Tunnel-1
Internet WAN
Internet
Internet WAN
Home Agent
HA Loopback
Virtual Interface
Corresponding Node
Source – Will Ivancic

18. Collocated Care-Of-Address
Mobile-Router (IPv4)
Collocated Care-Of-Address
Virtual LAN
Interface
Mobile Router
(Mobile Node)
Roaming
Interface
Tunnel-0
MR Loopback
Virtual Interface
COA
Access Router
Internet WAN
Internet
Internet WAN
Home Agent
HA Loopback
Virtual Interface
Corresponding Node
Source – Will Ivancic

19. Mobile Networking Additional Features
Geographically Distributed Home Agents
Asymmetrical Pathing
Source – Will Ivancic

20. Secondary Home Agent (reparenting the HA)X
Secondary
Home Agent
Primary
Home Agent
Reparenting Home Agent
Helps resolve triangular routing
Problem over long distances
Source – Will Ivancic

21. Emergency Backup (Hub / Spoke Network)
If primary control site becomes
physically inaccessible but can be
electronically connected, a
secondary site can be established.
If primary control site is physically incapacitated, there is no backup capability.
Source – Will Ivancic

22. Secondary Home Agent (Fully Meshed Network)
If primary control site is physically incapacitated, a second or third or forth site take over automatically. 3 5 1 2 4
Source – Will Ivancic

23. Asymmetrical Pathing DVB Satellite MilStar, Globalstar, Others
Mobile Router
Internet
Foreign Agent
Foreign Agent
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

24. Securing Mobile and Wireless Networks
Some ways may be “better” than others!
Source – Will Ivancic

25. Constraints / Tools Policy Architecture Protocols
Source – Will Ivancic

26. (Private Address Space)
IPv4 Utopian Operation CN
US Coast Guard
Operational Network
(Private Address Space)
Public
Internet
US Coast Guard
Mobile Network HA
Triangular Routing FA MR
Source – Will Ivancic

27. IPv4 Mobile-IP Addressing
Source Address is obtained from
Foreign Agent
Static Collocated Care-of-Address (CCoA)
DHCP via Access Router (Dynamic CCoA)
Private Address space is not routable via the Open Internet
Topologically Incorrect Addresses should be blocked via Ingress or Egress filtering
Source – Will Ivancic

28. IPv4 “Real World” OperationCN
Proxy had not originated the request; therefore, the response is squelched.
Peer-to-peer networking becomes problematic at best.
Glenn Research Center Policy:
No UDP, No IPSec, etc…
Mobile-IP stopped in its tracks.
What’s your policy?
US Coast Guard
Operational Network
(Private Address Space)
Public
Internet P R O X y
US Coast Guard
Mobile Network HA
USCG Requires 3DES encryption.
WEP is not acceptable due to known deficiencies.
Ingress or Egress Filtering stops
Transmission due to topologically
Incorrect source address. IPv6
Corrects this problem. FA MR
Source – Will Ivancic

29. Current Solution – Reverse TunnelingCN
Adds Overhead and kills route optimization.
US Coast Guard
Operational Network
(Private Address Space)
Public
Internet P R O X y
US Coast Guard
Mobile Network HA FA
Anticipate similar problems for IPv6. MR
Source – Will Ivancic

30. Shared Network Infrastructure
Public
Internet FA MR
US Coast Guard
Canadian Coast Guard
ACME Shipping HA
ACME
SHIPPING
US Navy
Encrypting wireless links makes it very difficult to share infrastructure.
This is a policy issue.
Source – Will Ivancic

31. IPv6 Mobile-IP
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

32. Mobile-IPv6 No "foreign agent“ routers
Route optimization is a fundamental part of the protocol
Mobile IPv6 route optimization can operate securely even without pre-arranged security associations
Route optimization coexists efficiently with routers that perform "ingress filtering"
The movement detection mechanism in Mobile IPv6 provides bidirectional confirmation of a mobile node's ability to communicate with its default router in its current location
Most packets sent to a mobile node while away from home in Mobile IPv6 are sent using an IPv6 routing header rather than IP encapsulation
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

33. Mobile-IPv6
Modes for communications between the mobile node and a correspondent node
Bidirectional tunneling
Does not require Mobile IPv6 support from the correspondent node
“Route Optimization“
Requires the mobile node to register its current binding at the correspondent node.
Packets from the correspondent node can be routed directly to the care-of address of the mobile node
Source – Will Ivancic

34. IPv6 Extension Headers
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

35. Source-Routed Packet Topologically Correct Address
Source Address = mobile node’s care-of-address
Destination Address = correspondent node’s address
If we loose contact, Home knows where I am.
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

36. Routing in Mobile IPv6 Correspondent which knows the care-of address
Mobile Node “visiting” a foreign link
Source Routing
Home Agent
Tunneling
Correspondent which does not know the care-of address

37. Mobile-IPv6 using Reverse Tunneling
Mobile Node
“ ”
Access Router
Access Router
Internet or Intranet
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

38. Mobile-IPv6 using Route Optimization
Mobile Node
“ ”
Access Router
Access Router
Internet or Intranet
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

39. Mobile-IPv6 Binding Updatesx
Binding
Updates
Mobile Node
“ ”
Link UP
The number of
Binding Updates is
A Scalability Problem for
Mobile Networks
Access Router
Access Router
Internet or Intranet
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

40. Mobile IPv6 Security
Binding Updates use IPsec extension headers, or by the use of the Binding Authorization Data option
Prefix discovery is protected through the use of IPsec extension headers
Mechanisms related to transporting payload packets - such as the Home Address destination option and type 2 routing header have been specified in a manner which restricts their use in attacks
Source – Will Ivancic

41. NEMO NEtworks in Motion
Source – Will Ivancic

42. Networks In Motion (NEMO)
Working Group established in IETF in December 2002
Concerned with managing the mobility of an entire network, which changes, as a unit, its point of attachment to the Internet and thus its reachability in the topology.
Source – Will Ivancic

43. Goals
Standardizing some basic support mechanisms based on the bidirectional tunneling approach
Competed January 2005
Study the possible approaches and issues with providing more optimal routing
Ongoing as of January 2006
Source – Will Ivancic

44. Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol (RFC 3963)
The basic solution MUST use bi-directional tunnels
MNNs MUST be reachable at a permanent IP address and name.
MUST maintain continuous sessions (both unicast and multicast) between MNNs and arbitrary CNs after IP handover of (one of) the MRs.
The solution MUST not require modifications to any node other than MRs and HAs.
The solution MUST support fixed nodes, mobile hosts and mobile routers in the mobile network.
The solution MUST not prevent the proper operation of Mobile IPv6 (i.e. the solution MUST support MIPv6-enabled MNNs and MUST also allow MNNs to receive and process Binding Updates from arbitrary Mobile Nodes.)
The solution MUST treat all the potential configurations the same way (whatever the number of subnets, MNNs, nested levels of MRs, egress interfaces, ...)
The solution MUST support mobile networks attaching to other mobile networks (nested mobile networks).
Source – Will Ivancic

45. Work In Progress Route Optimization Load Sharing (monami)
Policy Based Routing (monami)
Multiple Home Agents from different Service Providers
Security Issues
Desirable for some applications (i.e. air traffic control, airline maintenance, entertainment)
Source – Will Ivancic

46. Basic Mobile Network Support for IPv6x
Mobile
Network
Nodes
Binding
Update
Mobile Network
Link UP
Access Router
Access Router
Internet or Intranet
Corresponding Node
Home Agent
Source – Will Ivancic

47. Mobile Nodes and Multiple Interfaces in IPv6 (monami6)

48. monami6
Produce standard track specifications to the straight-forward problems associated with the simultaneous use of multiple addresses for either mobile hosts using Mobile IPv6 or mobile routers using NEMO Basic Support and their variants (FMIPv6, HMIPv6, etc)
Provide standardized support for simultaneous differentiated use of multiple access technologies
802.11*, , , UMTS, Bluetooth and others
WG Deliverables:
Documentation of motivations for a node using multiple interfaces and the scenarios where it may end up with multiple global addresses on its interfaces [Informational]
Analysis document explaining what are the limitations for mobile hosts using multiple simultaneous Care-of Addresses and Home Agent addresses using Mobile IPv6, whether issues are specific to Mobile IPv6 or not [Informational].
A protocol extension to Mobile IPv6 (RFC 3775) and NEMO Basic Support (RFC 3963) to support the registration of multiple Care-of Addresses at a given Home Agent address [Standard Track].
A "Flow/binding policies exchange" solution for an exchange of policies from the mobile host/router to the Home Agent and from the Home Agent to the mobile host/router influencing the choice of the Care-of Address and Home Agent address [Standard Track].

49. Policy-Base Routing Airline Example
P-DATA
High speed link
P-DATA
P-DATA
P-DATA
AOC
HomeAgent
int1
P-DATA
ATC
Low latency link
AOC
AOC
P-DATA
int2
ATC
Reliable link
int3
ATC
ATC
AOC
Routing Policy
Routing Policy
P-DATA: Passenger Data (Non-Critical Information)
AOC: Airline Operations Control (2nd Highest Priority)
ATC: Air Traffic Management (Highest Priority - Safety of Flight)

50. Policy-Base Routing Airline Example
P-DATA
High speed link
P-DATA
AOC
HomeAgent
int1
ATC
Low latency link
AOC
P-DATA
int2
ATC
Reliable link
int3
ATC
ATC
Routing Policy
Routing Policy
P-DATA: Passenger Data (Non-Critical Information)
AOC: Airline Operations Control (2nd Highest Priority)
ATC: Air Traffic Management (Highest Priority - Safety of Flight)

51. Policy-Base Routing Airline Example
P-DATA
High speed link
P-DATA
P-DATA
P-DATA
AOC
ATC
AOC
HomeAgent
int1
P-DATA
ATC
Low latency link
int2
AOC
P-DATA
Reliable link
int3
ATC
Routing Policy
Routing Policy
P-DATA: Passenger Data (Non-Critical Information)
AOC: Airline Operations Control (2nd Highest Priority)
ATC: Air Traffic Management (Highest Priority - Safety of Flight)

52. Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET)
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

53. MANET Characteristics
What is Mobile Ad-Hoc Networking (MANET)
Self-configuring and self-organizing network of mobile nodes usually connected via wireless links
Consists of mobile platforms / nodes (e.g., a router with multiple hosts) which are free to move about arbitrarily.
Initial research and development based on mutual trust and cooperation
MANET routing is a layer-3, network layer technology.
Dynamic, changing,random, multi-hop topologies may require traversing multiple links to reach a destination
May have frequent network partitions and merging
Routing may change because of mobility (or wireless link dynamics – fading)
Routing functionality need to support robust and efficient operation
May require energy-constrained operation
Source: Albert Young - Boeing

54. MANET Characteristics
Bandwidth constrained,variable capacity wireless links
Effective throughput is much less than a radio maximum transmission rate after accounting for the effects of multiple access, fading, noise, propagation path loss and interference
Limited physical security
Increased possibility of eavesdropping, spoofing, and denial-of-service attacks
Ad-hoc network clusters can operate autonomously or be attached at some point(s) to the fixed Internet –Stub network
The decentralized nature of network control in MANETs provides additional robustness against the single points of failure of more centralized approaches.
Equipped with wireless transceivers using antennas which may be omni-directional (broadcast),directional (point-to-point), possibly electronically steerable or a combination.
Source: Albert Young - Boeing

55. Applications Sensor Webs
Forest Fires Monitoring
Pollution Monitoring
Environmental Monitoring
Inexpensive alternatives or enhancements to cell-based mobile network infrastructures.
Military networking for robust, IP-compliant data services within mobile wireless communication networks consist of highly-dynamic autonomous topology segments.
Homeland Security
Scenarios requiring rapidly-deployable communications with survivable, efficient dynamic networking
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

56. Status of MANET Defense Programs are extremely interested in MANETs
Self-Organizing, robust, self-healing
Major research funding source.
IETF MANET working
Promoting a few “experimental” deployments (a reactive and a proactive routing technique)
Using mature components from previous work on experimental reactive and proactive protocols, the WG will develop two Standards track routing protocol specifications:
Reactive MANET Protocol (RMP)
Proactive MANET Protocol (PMP)
Develop a scoped forwarding protocol that can efficiently flood data packets to all participating MANET nodes. The primary purpose of this mechanism is a simplified best effort multicast forwarding function.
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

57. Deployments (Sampling – Many others are available)
Dynamic MANET On-demand (DYMO) routing protocol
Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV)
Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR)
Navy Research Lab, INRIA (fr), NIIGATA (jp), GRC, LRI (fr), Communication Research Centre in Canada, UniK University
URL for all sources:
Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)

58. Routing Standards and Research
One Size Does Not Fit All! No single routing protocol works well in all environments
Which approach to choose depends on the traffic and mobility patterns, and QoS requirements
Proactive routing protocols Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR), Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) extension
Applicable for relatively stable networks
Suitable for large and dense networks
Reactive routing protocol Ad Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV), Dynamic Source Routing protocol (DSR), Dynamic MANET On-demand (DYMO)
Enables reactive, multihop routing between participating nodes that wish to communicate.
Applicable to highly dynamic networks
Motivation is for interoperability with the wired
Modification (e.g. neighbor establishment) and scalability enhancements to OSPFv3 that is designed for IPv6
Specifically in reducing the size of Hello packets, and optimizing flooding of routing updates.
In wireless environments, OSPF’s “proactive” approach to routing causes wasted overhead that often saturates the wireless medium with control traffic for routes that are never used.
Existing IP routing protocols can be classified either as “proactive” or “reactive”. Proactive protocols attempt to continuously evaluate all of the routes within a network – so that when a packet needs to be forwarded, a route is already known and can be used immediately. OSPF is an example of a Proactive Routing Protocol (PRP) for wired IP backbone networks. MANET-specific examples include Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) [1], Topology Broadcast based on Reverse Path Forwarding (TBRPF) [2] and Hazy Sighted Link State Routing [3]. In contrast, Reactive Routing Protocols (RRPs) invoke a route determination procedure “on-demand” only. Thus, if route is needed then some sort of global-search procedure is employed. The classical flood-search algorithms are simple reactive-protocols. MANET-optimized examples include Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) [4] and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) [5].
It is well-known that proactive-protocols are not optimal for either MANETs that have rapidly changing topologies or sensor networks that require emission control (EMCON) modes-of-operation. However, purely reactive protocols are often inappropriate for several common MANET topologies such as cluster-based networks and relatively static networks. In addition, reactive protocols introduce additional latency (and possibly overhead) for real-time traffic. As such, “hybrid” or “zone” routing protocols that use a mix of both proactive and reactive routing techniques at each network node have been proposed.
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

59. Benefits of IPv6 in MANETs
IPv6 couple together with MANET offers ease and speed of deployment, and decreased dependence on infrastructure
Provide End-to-End Global Addressing
Autoconfiguration of link-local addresses
Possible End-to-End Security with integrated IPSec
Support for source routing
Full support of mobility
No broadcast traffic to hamper wireless network efficiency
Potential support of real-time delivery of data with QoS
Potential to utilize Anycast addressing
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

60. Challenges Denial of Service Network Discovery Security Key Management
DAD DoS, Uncooperative Router, etc…
Neighbor Discovery trust and threats
Network Discovery
Reachback, DNS, Key Manager
Security
IPSec / HAIPES tunnel end-points
Security Policies in a dynamic environment
Is layer-2 encryption sufficient security?
Insecure routing
Attackers may inject erroneous routing information to divert network traffic, or make routing inefficient
Key Management
Lack of key distribution mechanism
Hard to guarantee access to any particular node (e.g. obtain a secret key)
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

61. Challenges Duplicate Address Discovery Radio Technology
Not suitable for multi-hop ad hoc networks that have dynamic network topology
Need to address situation where two MANET partitions merge
Radio Technology
Layer-2 media access often incompatible with layer-3 MANET routing protocol
Battery exhaustion threat
A malicious node may interact with a mobile node very often trying to drain the mobile node’s battery
Testing of Applications
Integrating MANET into the Internet
© 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

62. Integrating MANET into the Internet
Unicast Address Autoconfiguration
Multicast Address Autoconfiguration
Multicast Name Resolution
Service Discovery
Global Connectivity between MANET and Internet
Source: