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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Foreign Agents Bi-directional Tunnel Mobile Node “ ” Home IP 128.183.13.103 Care-Off-Address 139.88.111.50 Foreign Agent Foreign Agent 143.232.48.1 139.88.111.1 139.88.112.1 NASA Glenn 143.232.48.1 NASA Ames Internet or Intranet Bi-directional Tunnel if Reverse Tunneling Is specified. 128.183.13.1 NASA Goddard Corresponding Node Home Agent Source – Will Ivancic

Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Foreign Agents Mobile Node “ ” Home IP 128.183.13.103 Care-Off-Address 139.88.111.50 Foreign Agent Foreign Agent 143.232.48.1 139.88.111.1 139.88.112.1 NASA Glenn 143.232.48.1 NASA Ames Internet or Intranet 128.183.13.1 NASA Goddard Corresponding Node Home Agent Source – Will Ivancic

Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Foreign Agents (Reverse Tunneling) Mobile Node “ ” Home IP 128.183.13.103 Care-Off-Address 139.88.111.50 Foreign Agent Foreign Agent 143.232.48.1 139.88.111.1 139.88.112.1 NASA Glenn 143.232.48.1 NASA Ames Internet or Intranet 128.183.13.1 NASA Goddard Corresponding Node Home Agent Source – Will Ivancic

Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Collocated Care-Of-Address DHCP or Connection Established Mobile Node “ ” Home IP 128.183.13.103 Care-Off-Address 139.88.111.50 Access Router Access Router 143.232.48.1 139.88.111.1 139.88.112.1 NASA Glenn 143.232.48.1 NASA Ames Internet or Intranet Bi-directional Tunnel if Reverse Tunneling Is specified. 128.183.13.1 NASA Goddard Corresponding Node Home Agent Source – Will Ivancic

Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Collocated Care-Of-Address Mobile Node “ ” Home IP 128.183.13.103 Care-Off-Address 139.88.111.50 Access Router Access Router 143.232.48.1 139.88.111.1 139.88.112.1 NASA Glenn 143.232.48.1 NASA Ames Internet or Intranet 128.183.13.1 NASA Goddard Corresponding Node Home Agent Source – Will Ivancic

Mobile-IP (IPv4) using Collocated Care-Of-Address (Reverse Tunneling) Mobile Node “ ” Home IP 128.183.13.103 Care-Off-Address 139.88.111.50 Access Router Access Router 143.232.48.1 139.88.111.1 139.88.112.1 NASA Glenn 143.232.48.1 NASA Ames Internet or Intranet 128.183.13.1 NASA Goddard Corresponding Node Home Agent Source – Will Ivancic

Bi-directional Tunnel Mobile-Router (IPv4) Mobile Router 128.184.24.2 128.184.24.1 Virtual LAN Interface Mobile Router (Mobile Node) 10.2.2.1 Roaming Interface Bi-directional Tunnel if Reverse Tunneling Is specified. Tunnel-0 128.184.26.1 MR Loopback Virtual Interface COA 139.88.100.1 139.88.100.1 FA WAN Tunnel-1 Foreign Agent 139.88.112.1 Internet WAN Internet 128.183.13.1 Internet WAN Home Agent 128.184.25.1 HA Loopback Virtual Interface Corresponding Node Source – Will Ivancic

Mobile-Router (IPv4) Mobile Router (Reverse Tunneling) 128.184.24.2 128.184.24.1 Virtual LAN Interface Mobile Router (Mobile Node) 10.2.2.1 Roaming Interface Tunnel-0 128.184.26.1 MR Loopback Virtual Interface COA 139.88.100.1 139.88.100.1 FA WAN Tunnel-1 Foreign Agent 139.88.112.1 Internet WAN Internet 128.183.13.1 Internet WAN Home Agent 128.184.25.1 HA Loopback Virtual Interface Corresponding Node Source – Will Ivancic

Collocated Care-Of-Address Mobile-Router (IPv4) Collocated Care-Of-Address 128.184.24.2 128.184.24.1 Virtual LAN Interface Mobile Router (Mobile Node) 10.2.2.1 Roaming Interface Tunnel-0 128.184.26.1 MR Loopback Virtual Interface COA 139.88.100.1 139.88.100.1 FA WAN No Foreign Agent No Second Tunnel Foreign Agent Tunnel-1 139.88.112.1 Internet WAN Internet 128.183.13.1 Internet WAN Home Agent 128.184.25.1 HA Loopback Virtual Interface Corresponding Node Source – Will Ivancic

Collocated Care-Of-Address Mobile-Router (IPv4) Collocated Care-Of-Address 128.184.24.2 128.184.24.1 Virtual LAN Interface Mobile Router (Mobile Node) 10.2.2.1 Roaming Interface Tunnel-0 128.184.26.1 MR Loopback Virtual Interface COA 139.88.100.1 139.88.100.1 Access Router 139.88.112.1 Internet WAN Internet 128.183.13.1 Internet WAN Home Agent 128.184.25.1 HA Loopback Virtual Interface Corresponding Node Source – Will Ivancic

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

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

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

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

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

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

Constraints / Tools Policy Architecture Protocols Source – Will Ivancic

(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

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

IPv4 “Real World” Operation CN 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

Current Solution – Reverse Tunneling CN 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

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

IPv6 Mobile-IP © 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

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

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

IPv6 Extension Headers © 2004 Syzygy Engineering – Will Ivancic

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

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

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

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

Mobile-IPv6 Binding Updates x 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

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

NEMO NEtworks in Motion http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/nemo-charter.html http://www.nal.motlabs.com/nemo/ Source – Will Ivancic

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

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

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

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

Basic Mobile Network Support for IPv6 x Mobile Network Nodes Binding Update Mobile Network Link UP Access Router Access Router Internet or Intranet Corresponding Node Home Agent Source – Will Ivancic

Mobile Nodes and Multiple Interfaces in IPv6 (monami6)

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*, 802.16, 802.20, 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].

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)

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)

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)

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

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

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

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

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

Deployments (Sampling – Many others are available) Dynamic MANET On-demand (DYMO) routing protocol http://moment.cs.ucsb.edu/dymo/index.php Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV) http://www.nmsl.cs.ucsb.edu/~krishna/aodv-linksys/ http://w3.antd.nist.gov/wctg/aodv_kernel/ http://crl.se/?go=aodv6 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: http://hipercom.inria.fr/olsr/#code http://www.olsr.org/ Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) http://www.monarch.cs.rice.edu/dsr-impl.html http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/grid/software.html#install http://core.it.uu.se/AdHoc/DsrUUImpltp://core.it.uu.se/AdHoc/DsrUUImpl

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

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

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

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

Integrating MANET into the Internet Unicast Address Autoconfiguration Multicast Address Autoconfiguration Multicast Name Resolution Service Discovery Global Connectivity between MANET and Internet Source: http://www.adhoc.6ants.net/