1. IEEE 802.21 MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN: 21-06-0348-06-0000 Title: MIIS and Its Higher Layer Transport Requirements: Ad hoc Update and Discussion on Individual Drafts Date Submitted: March 06, 2006 Authors or Source(s): Subir Das Abstract: This document gives a brief summary of IS Ad hoc telecon updates and Discussion on Individual Draft submission in MIPSHOP WG

2. IEEE 802.21 presentation release statements This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE 802.21 Working Group. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.21. The contributor is familiar with IEEE patent policy, as outlined in Section 6.3 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual and in Understanding Patent Issues During IEEE Standards Development http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/guide.html> Section 6.3 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manualhttp://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3 http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/guide.html

3. 21-05-0348-04-annex-0000 Introduction 1. IS Ad Hoc Meeting Updates (Pl. refer to meeting notes: 21-06-0556-00-0000….) 1. Discussion on Individual Drafts submitted to IETF MIPSHOP WG

4. 21-05-0348-04-annex-0000 Outline of the Draft 1. Introduction 2.Information Service Reference Model 3. Scenarios for IS Transport over IP 4. Information Service Reference Model and Interfaces 3.1 Transport Layer Issues 3.2 Information Service Discovery Issues 3.3 Reliability Issues 3.4 Congestion Control Issues 3.5 Security Issues 5. Requirements for Transport over IP 6.Security Considerations

5. Information Service (IS) Reference Model IS-Client IS-Server UNC IS-Client IS-Proxy IS-Server UNC Multi hop Model Single hop Model NNC IS-Client IS-Server UNC NNC UNC  User network Communication NNC  Network to Network Communication

6. Use-Cases Case 1: IS-Server on the Access Router Case 2: IS-Server on the Core Network (e.g., Home) Case 3: IS-Server on the Core Network (e.g., Visited) Case 4: IS-Server on the Core Network ( e.g., both Visited and Home)

7. Case 1: IS-Server on Access Router IS- Client Host Core Network Access Router Access Point IS- Server

8. Case 3: IS-Server on Core Network (Home) IS- Client Host IS- Server Core Network (Home) Access Router Access Point Visited Network (Core)

9. Case 3: IS-Server on Core Network (Visited) IS- Client Host IS- Server Core Network (Home) Access Router Access Point Visited Network (Core)

10. Case 4: IS-Server on Core Network (Home and Visited) IS- Client Host IS- Server Core Network (Home) Access RouterAccess Point Access Router Access Point IS- Server Core Network (Visited)

11. Requirements for Transport Over IP The IS transport MUST work both for IPv4 and IPv6 networks The choice of transport mechanism should work with both IPv4 and IPv6 networks. The IS protocol requires that security MUST be provided at the transport layer The MIIS message exchanges are critical to handover decision process. Therefore it has to be trusted. However, IS protocol framework does not add security at every message level. Thus it relies upon the underlying security. In such cases, the transport mechanism MUST support the necessary security. The IS transport MUST provide peer authentication The IS transport MUST provide message authentication and may provide confidentiality The IS transport MUST provide replay protection

12. Requirements for Transport Over IP The IS transport MUST support the NAT traversal The transport protocol should allow the communication between MIHFs if they are behind the NAT box. The IS transport MUST support the firewall traversal The transport protocol should allow the communication between MIHFs if they are behind the firewall. Changes to the header fields, IEs and structure messages should not affect the security mechanisms defined for underlying transmission. MIIS defines the IE and MIH protocol formats that are processed by only MIHF peer entities. Any changes to these formats and fields MUST not require modifying the underlying security mechanisms in future.

13. MIPSHOP Charter New Charter: Work on areas of mutual interest to IEEE 802.21 and MIPSHOP: Produce the required protocol enhancements or specifications for IP-based support of Media-Independent Information, Command and Event Services. Documents: draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt (transport of 802.21 information elements over IP), draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt (transport of 802.21 services over IP, including security aspect)

14. Current Drafts Two Drafts related to Information Service Problem Statement Draft draft-hepworth-mipshop-mih-problem-statement-01 Information Service Draft draft-faccin-mih-infoserv-02.txt

15. Current Individual Drafts on IS Two Drafts: Problem Statement Draft draft-hepworth-mipshop-mih-problem-statement-01.txt IS Draft draft-faccin-mih-infoserv-02.txt

16. Observations/Comments Both drafts have currently more materials than what we have discussed so far We would need some discussions on how to proceed with these two drafts Continue as Individual WG consensus Based on discussions and comments folks can update the draft A rough consensus within.21 WG would be good before Next IETF