Doc.: IEEE 802.11-04/0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 1 Analysis of Roaming Techniques Areg Alimian Communication.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /1186r0 Submission October 2004 Aboba and HarkinsSlide 1 PEKM (Post-EAP Key Management Protocol) Bernard Aboba, Microsoft Dan Harkins,
Advertisements

May 2004 doc.: _wired_wireless_LAN_handover_r0 Samsung AIT Considerations regarding L2&L3 Schemes in 802.3/ Handover Xiaoyu Liu
IEEE P802 Handoff ECSG Submission July 2003 Bernard Aboba, Microsoft Detection of Network Attachment (DNA) and Handoff ECSG Bernard Aboba Microsoft July.
Doc.:IEEE /1523r4 Submission November 2011 Access Delay Reduction for FILS: Network Discovery & Access congestion Improvements Slide 1 Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1521r2 Submission January 2012 Marc Emmelmann, FOKUSSlide 1 AP and Network Discovery Enhancements Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-13/0343r0 Operator Oriented Wi-Fi — Problem Analysis and Proposals Dapeng Liu Chunju Shao Fang Xie Ge Liu China Mobile.
Fast L3 Handoff in Wireless LANs Andrea G. Forte Sangho Shin Henning Schulzrinne.
Doc.: Handoff_WNG_Presentation r3 Submission July David Johnston, IntelSlide Handoff Presentation to WNG David Johnston.
Advantage Century Telecommunication Corp. AIL: Actively Intelligent Link-Layer Handoff Guo-Yuan Mikko Wang
Detection of Network Attachment (DNA) in IPv4 Bernard Aboba Microsoft Draft-aboba-dhc-nad-ipv4-00.txt DNA BOF IETF 57 Vienna, Austria Monday, July 15,
1 Channel Assignment Strategies Handoff (Handover) Process Handoff: Changing physical radio channels of network connections involved in a call,
Inter-Subnet Mobile IP Handoffs in b Wireless LANs Albert Hasson.
CSMA/CA in IEEE Physical carrier sense, and Virtual carrier sense using Network Allocation Vector (NAV) NAV is updated based on overheard RTS/CTS/DATA/ACK.
Doc.: IEEE /1323r0 November 2012 Submission Relays for ah Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /1183r0 Submission September 2011 Masataka Ohta, Tokyo Institute of TechnologySlide 1 IP over Congested WLAN Date: Authors:
Wireless Design for Voice Last Update Copyright 2011 Kenneth M. Chipps Ph.D.
Overview of IEEE and MAC Layer September 25, 2009 SungHoon Seo
Cooperation in Wireless Networks Andrea G. Forte Henning Schulzrinne November 14, 2005.
Handoff Delay for b Wireless LANs Masters Project defense Anshul Jain Committee: Dr. Henning Schulzrinne, Columbia University Dr. Zongming Fei, University.
Doc.: IEEE /0550 Submission NameAffiliationsAddressPhone Kiseon RyuLG Electronics10225 Willow Creek Rd, San Diego, CA, 92131, USA +1
Doc.: IEEE /491r2 SubmissionL. Cariou, Orange Labs Date: Fast Session Transfer May 2010 L. Cariou, Orange LabsSlide 1 Authors:
Unwanted Link Layer Traffic in Large IEEE Wireless Network By Naga V K Akkineni.
CWNA Guide to Wireless LANs, Second Edition
Handoff in IEEE Andrea G. Forte Sangho Shin Prof. Henning Schulzrinne.
IEEE Submission May 2004 Vivek Gupta, Intel CorpSlide 1 Global Network Neighborhood Vivek Gupta Intel Corporation May 2004.
Doc.: IEEE /0257r1 Submission NameAffiliationsAddressPhone Giwon ParkLG Electronics LG R&D Complex 533, Hogye- 1dong, Dongan-Gu, Anyang,
Doc.: IEEE /0648r0 Submission May 2014 Chinghwa Yu et. al., MediaTekSlide 1 Performance Observation of a Dense Campus Network Date:
An Empirical Analysis of the IEEE MAC Layer Handoff Process Arunesh Mishra Minho Shin William Arbaugh University of Maryland,College Park,MD.
Doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 1 Network Selection Bernard Aboba Microsoft
Doc.: IEEE /562r1 Submission November 2001 Tim Moore, Bernard Aboba/Microsoft Authenticated Fast Handoff IEEE Tgi Tim Moore Bernard Aboba.
Doc.: IEEE r Submission November 2004 Bob Beach, Symbol TechnologiesSlide 1 Fast Roaming Using Multiple Concurrent Associations Bob.
Doc.: IEEE /1019r0 Submission September 2004 Soohong Daniel Park & Jaehwan Lee Access Router Identifier (ARID) for supporting L3 mobility Soohong.
Submission Page 1 November 2002 doc.: IEEE /677r0 Daryl Kaiser, Cisco Systems Radio Measurement Actions Daryl Kaiser (Cisco Systems) 12 November.
Doc.: IEEE /610r0 Submission November 2001 Tim Moore, Microsoft 802.1X and key interactions Tim Moore.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-12/535r1 May 2012 Jarkko Kneckt, NokiaSlide 1 Scanning and FILS requirements Date: Authors:
Cooperation between stations in wireless networks Andrea G. Forte, Henning Schulzrinne Department of Computer Science, Columbia University Presented by:
Doc.: IEEE /345r0 Submission May 2002 Albert Young, Ralink TechnologySlide 1 Enabling Seamless Hand-Off Across Wireless Networks Albert Young.
Doc.: IEEE /008r0 Submission January 2003 N. Cam-Winget, D. Smith, K. AmannSlide 1 Proposed new AKM for Fast Roaming Nancy Cam-Winget, Cisco Systems.
October 17, 2007 Cooperation Between Stations in Wireless Networks Andrea G. Forte Henning Schulzrinne Department of Computer Science Columbia University.
Doc.: IEEE /610r0 Submission November 2001 Tim Moore, Microsoft 802.1X and key interactions Tim Moore.
Doc.: IEEE /0042r1 Submission January 2013 Yongho Seok, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 Fast Moving Scan Channel Date: Authors: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.:IEEE /1523r1 Submission November 2011 Access Delay Reduction for FILS: Network Discovery & Access congestion Improvements Slide 1 Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0176r0 Submission Slide 1 March 2005 Stephen Wang, et. al. Measurement Pilot Frame Steve Emeott, Walter Johnson, Floyd Simpson, Stephen.
1 An Empirical Analysis of the IEEE MAC Layer Handoff Process Arunesh Mishra Minho Shin William Arbaugh University of Maryland College Park,MD,USA.
Performance Comparison of Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols Presented by Venkata Suresh Tamminiedi Computer Science Department Georgia State University.
Doc.: IEEE /1183r1 Submission September 2011 Masataka Ohta, Tokyo Institute of TechnologySlide 1 IP over Congested WLAN Date: Authors:
Trend of Mobility Management Yen-Wen Chen Ref: 1.Draft IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks: Media Independent Handover Services 2.Transport.
Doc.: IEEE /492r00 Submission Orange Labs Date: Collaboration between 2.4/5 and 60 GHz May 2010 Slide 1 Authors:
Introduction to “Tap – Dance ”. Company Proprietary Presentation Topics  Introduction  Handover scenarios  Inter-Network Handover consequences  Common.
Andrea G. Forte Sangho Shin Henning Schulzrinne
The Network Beacon Announcement scanning method
Wireless Mesh Networks
Roaming Interval Measurements
Fast Session Transfer Date: Authors: May 2010 March 2010
doc.: IEEE /252 Bernard Aboba Microsoft
Roaming Keith Amann, Spectralink
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
Analysis of Roaming Techniques
Prioritized Active Scanning in TGai
Cooperation Between Stations in Wireless Networks
Mobility Support in Wireless LAN
Using The Site Report to Target Potential Roam Candidates
doc.: IEEE /1072r0 Dan Harkins Trapeze Networks
doc.: IEEE /1072r0 Dan Harkins Trapeze Networks
Fast Session Transfer Date: Authors: May 2010 March 2010
Thinking About the Site Report
Fast Active Scan Proposals
Cooperative AP Discovery
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
Site Report Conceptual Model
Presentation transcript:

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 1 Analysis of Roaming Techniques Areg Alimian Communication Machinery Corporation Bernard Aboba Microsoft

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 2 Outline Roaming Definition & Phases Test Configurations for roaming measurements Contributors to handoff latency Existing and emerging solutions for fast handoff Conclusions

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 3 How do we define roaming? Roaming latency –“The period from when the STA last receives data traffic via its old AP and when it receives data from the new AP is often referred to as the handoff latency or handoff delay”. Triggering roaming –When the STA moves away from its current AP, the signal quality of the messages from the above AP will decrease. –At some (configurable) signal quality threshold, or after a number of failed retransmission attempts, the STA starts looking for a ‘better” AP to reassociate with, triggering a handover procedure.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 4 Handoff Scenario Channel 6 Channel 11 AP A AP B STA v c D c ~ ft D ~ ft Latency Contributors scan 802.1X authentication 4-way handshake Movement detection Address assignment Duplicate detection IKE renegotiation MIP signalling TCP adjustment period

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 5 Latency Budget LayerItem IPv4 Best Case (ms) IPv4 Worst Case (ms) IPv6 Best Case (ms)IPv6 Worst Case (ms) L scan (passive)0 (cached)1 sec (wait for Beacon)0 (cached)1 sec (wait for Beacon) L scan (active) L assoc/reassoc (no IAPP) 4204 L assoc/reassoc (w/ IAPP) L X authentication (full) L2802.1X Fast resume L2 Fast handoff (4-way handshake only) L3 DHCPv4 (6to4 scenario only) L3IPv4 DAD 0 (DNA) L3Initial RS/RA00510 L3Wait for more RAs L3IPv6 DAD000 (Optimistic DAD)1000 L3MN-HA BU L3MN-CN BU L4TCP adjustment0Varies0

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 6 Logical Steps/Phases in Handoff Detection/Rate adaptation –Mobile station starts adjusting the traffic rate all the way down to the minimum for its PHY (rate fallback ). –The signal strength and the signal-to-noise ratio of the signal from a station’s current AP degrade and the station retransmits without a response. Scanning –Mobile station initiates active scanning to probe for nearby APs. Association/Reassociation 802.1X (re-)authentication –STA attempts (re)authentication with the new AP. With PMK Caching/SAs the EAP authentication phase with a back-end server is not necessary. IEEE AKM IP Layer Configuration –Acquiring a valid IP address –Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) –Mobile IP signaling –IKE signaling (if required) Transport layer adjustment –TCP adjustment period

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide Handoff Problem Space Station Velocity StationaryPedestrianVehicular  T/B Scan + Radio tuning Scan + Pre-auth via Old AP c  T PA D  T Reassoc Association not possible High Speed D  T FH 4-way handshake, no 802.1X 3-way handshake, no 802.1X D  T PA Pre-Auth + Neighbor graph

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 8 Handoff Test Metrics Summary Rate adaptation –Rate adaptation time –Packet loss during rate adaptation (Re)authentication –(Re)authentication (AKM) without prior security Association states. –(Re)authentication (AKM) without prior security State. –(Re)authentication with IAPP. Roaming –Handoff Interval –Downstream loss during handover –Session continuity during handover –Upstream delay Scanning –Passive Scanning –Active Scanning Behavioral –Roaming hysteresis –Rate adaptation hysteresis Network Connectivity resumption –Valid IP address acquisition/ IP configuration –Transport adaptation

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 9 Test Scenarios for Handoff Performance Handoff Triggering Mechanisms –The power to the current AP is switched off –Decreasing the Tx power of current AP –Changing the load on the current AP Injecting Traffic Patterns during handoff –Unidirectional upstream traffic from STA to a host on the LAN –Unidirectional downstream traffic from LAN host to STA. –Bidirectional traffic between STA and LAN host. –2 nd STA at the new AP competing for media access.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 10 General Observations Based on Test Data Handoff triggering mechanism (power off vs. Tx Power reduction) affects movement “detection” time. Traffic pattern during roam affects overall handoff latency and packet loss during roam. Handoff latency varies significantly based on specific equipment, especially STAs.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 11 Handover Latency Summary Detection and active scanning probe phase can be too long, therefore increasing overall roaming latency. Rate adaptation down to 1 or 2 Mbps can take significant time and affects the throughput of other STAs if one or more STA are connected at the lower rate. Significant delays at L3 –IP address assignment (when DHCP server is far from host) –Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) –Mobile IP signaling Significant delays at L4 in some scenarios –Movement from high bw/low delay network to low bw/high delay network

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 12 The current probe function The probe function is the IEEE MAC active scan function And the standard specifies a scanning procedure as follows: For each channel to be scanned, 1. STA sends a probe request with broadcast destination, SSID, and broadcast BSSID. 2. STA starts a ProbeTimer. 3. If medium is not busy before the ProbeTimer reaches MinChannelTime, scan the next channel, else when ProbeTimer reaches MaxChannelTime, process all received probe responses and proceed to next channel.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 13 Existing Techniques for Handover Optimization Limiting Rate adaptation range –Allowing negotiation of 1 and 2 Mbps rates is very time consuming. –If there are one or more stations associated at lower rates, this will limit the throughput of stations associated at higher rates. AP Initiated Handoff –At the PHY Layer Optimized Active Scanning –Scan most likely channels first. –Obtain channel list from the AP. –Fast Active Scanning. Sending a probe request to a specific AP on its operation channel designating as the sole responder. Designated AP sends probe response after SIFS deferral.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 14 Existing Techniques for Handover Optimization - 2 Providing “Candidate Lists” to roaming STA –Roaming Station can request a candidate list from the AP to obtain relevant information about neighborhood STAs. –A “Site Report” is not necessarily the same as a “candidate list” –Difference: The list of all neighbors vs. the list of authorized, functional neighbors Optimized IP Layer configuration –Significant delays in Layer 3 due to Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) and IP address assignment IPv4: significant delay in DHCP where the DHCP server is far away from the host. IPv6: delays due to movement detection constants –DNA reduces IP address assignment delays for intra-subnet roaming, provided there are reliable “hints” from L2 –Optimistic DAD (IPv6 only) reduces DAD delays

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 15 Detection of Network Attachment (DNA) The time required to detect movement (or lack of movement) between subnets, and to obtain (or continue to use) a valid IP address may be significant as a fraction of the total delay in moving between points of attachment. As a result, optimizing detection of network attachment is important for mobile hosts. Detection of Network Attachment follows the principles below: –Treatment of Link-Up indications from the Link Layer –Link-Local addressing as a mechanism of last resort –Utilization of hints from the Link Layer on current Subnet –Performing reachability test instead address acquisition where a valid IP address exists on the “most likely” point of attachment –Sending a DHCPDISCOVER instead of a DHCPREQUEST if the subnet is likely to have changed.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 16 Issues with DNA Today, there are no reliable “hints” of subnet attachment SSID is not a reliable “hint” of subnet attachment –“Default” SSIDs are common; can disambiguate w/BSSID –STA may change prefix within same SSID –STA may keep same prefix when changing SSIDs (less likely) DNA will not optimize the IP configuration phase significantly without reliable link layer hints

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 17 Factors Affecting STA Roam Decision Factors that may affect the quality of the connection between the AP and the STA include: -Received Signal Power - Retransmissions Factors that affect which AP, currently, would be the best choice for a STA to (re)associate with to maintain the upper layer connection include the above considerations plus: –Loading/Load Balancing Considerations –Capability matching –SNR –Received Signal Strength –Security –SSID

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 18 Using Candidate List Reports A “candidate list report” contains information on APs that are valid handoff candidates for a STA –Valid = not a rogue, connected to the DS, forwarding frames, etc. In response to a “candidate list request”, AP in response will send –Candidate list report for the ESS specified. –If the SSID IE is not present it will send a Candidate List Report for the SSID for the current ESS. –If the AP has no information on the ESS of which the SSID has been requested it will send a Candidate List Response with a length of zero.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 19 Issues with the “Site Report” “Site report” may or may not be equivalent to a “candidate list report” –Is purpose of “site report” to obtain a list of all APs, or just valid roaming candidates? Site Report Response uses mgmt action frames which are not secured in the current specification. Even if the STA has the BSSID of the AP to pre- authenticate to, it needs to be within the AP’s coverage area to reassociate. The site report may not narrow the roaming candidates –“Site Report” may contain unsuitable roaming candidates –SNR is necessary to choose between roaming candidates –Using a “site report” as a “candidate list report” may cause the station to pre- authenticate to more APs, increasing load.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 20 Alternative Approaches Obtain neighbor information only after completion of authenticated key management (AKM) –Neighbor information obtained only from authenticated APs –“Candidate list” exchange is authenticated via a unicast key, not a group key –Semantics provide a “candidate list” not a “site report”

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 21 Handoff – Alternative Approach AP-Initiated handoff –WLAN switch approach PMKs made available to “dumb APs” by WLAN switch –IAPP approach PMKs propagated between APs –PHY layer approach Same SSID, same BSSID, same channel. STA does not know that it is roaming. Result is very small handoff latency. Realities –This approach is now ubiquitous (but non-interoperable). –Standardizing AP-initiated handoff is not a worthwhile activity –Probably more profitable to focus on other issues

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 22 Related Work Papers on this topic include: %20Handover%20in%20IEEE%20802.pdfhttp:// 02%20Handover%20in%20IEEE%20802.pdf frfh-measurement roaming-intervals.ppt (on

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 23 Conclusions Biggest challenges occur prior to authentication –Detection algorithms (when to roam) –Rate adaptation algorithms –Scanning latency (particularly for a/b/g devices) Potential solutions are available –Channel maps –Roaming Candidate lists –Active scan optimizations –Rate adaptation limits –DNA –Optimistic DAD Key management techniques not a high priority –TGi pre-authentication, PMK caching enables working systems today Fitting within 50ms VOIP budget is possible…. –And involves hard implementation work, not rocket science.

doc.: IEEE /0377r1 Submission March 2004 Areg Alimian CMC, Bernard Aboba MicrosoftSlide 24 Feedback?