Subject: [dns-dir] FW: WG Review: Recharter of Mobility Extensions (netext)

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:09:15 +0100

Please review the proposed charter and send me your comments and
concerns before 1/26. 

Thanks and Regards,

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
IESG Secretary
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 10:28 PM
To: IETF Announcement list
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: WG Review: Recharter of Mobility Extensions (netext) 

A modified charter has been submitted for the Mobility Extensions
(netext) working group in the Internet Area of the IETF.  The IESG has
not made any determination as yet.  The modified charter is provided
below for informational purposes only.  Please send your comments to the
IESG mailing list ([email-masked]) by Tuesday, January 26, 2010.

This update of the NETEXT working group's charter involves adding work
items related to cross-interface handover and flow mobility that were
discussed in the NETEXT2 BOF but not adopted by the IETF. After
discussions in the NETEXT WG meeting in Hiroshima, a significantly
reduced scope for the work was adopted, and this work is now being added
to the charter. In addition, one work item on RADIUS support moves from
the NETLMM WG to this WG. The differences to the current charter can be
seen at
http://www.arkko.com/ietf/netext/recharter_new_jari2-from-old.diff.html

Mobility Extensions (netext)
----------------------------
Last Modified: 2010-01-19

Current Status: Active Working Group

Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/netext

Chair(s):

* Rajeev Koodli <[email-masked]>
* Basavaraj Patil <[email-masked]>

Internet Area Director(s):

* Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
* Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>

Internet Area Advisor:

* Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>

Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: [email-masked]
To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
Archive:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext/current/maillist.html

Description of Working Group:

Proxy Mobile IPv6, specified in RFC 5213, is a network-based mobility
protocol. It uses a Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) and a Local Mobility
Anchor (LMA) to allow hosts to move around within a domain while keeping
their address or address prefix stable. Proxy Mobile IPv6 has been
incorporated into a number of products and deployments are starting.
Certain deployment considerations, including localized routing and bulk
refresh of lifetime are already emerging.

The working group will focus on the following topics relevant for
network-based mobility:

Localized Routing: a specification for routing traffic between the
MAG(s) without involving the LMA. That is, allow the MAGs to route
traffic between hosts from one MAG to another, without being tunneled
all the way to the LMA. This reduces latency and backhaul load.
Applications such as voice can benefit from the reduced latency.

Bulk Refresh: a specification of improving the signaling load for
binding lifetime refresh. The current specifications call for the
handling of each mobility session independent of each other. When a
large number of hosts are served by a single MAG, a periodic refresh of
the binding lifetimes can lead to a signaling storm. The purpose of the
Bulk Refresh feature is to construct a protocol feature that allows such
refreshes to occur on a per-MAG basis.

LMA Redirection: a specification for allowing an LMA to redirect a MAG
to another LMA. This is primarily needed as a way to perform load
balancing. This functionality is complementary to implementation
techniques that allow distributed MAG implementations to move tasks
around without a visible impact at the protocol level, and the initial
LMA discovery work in the NETLMM WG. An applicability statement
describing the situations where the new functionality is or is not
applicable has to be included in the specification.

Hiding access technology changes from host IP layer: Proxy mobility is
based on the assumption that changes in host IP stacks are undesirable.
However, link layer implementations can hide the actually used physical
interfaces from the IP stack. For instance, a single interface might
transmit packets over different media, as is common practice in certain
radio networks. This can be used to achieve inter-access handovers or
flow mobility, i.e., the movement of selected flows from one access
technology to another. The specification of any actual link layer
mechanisms is outside the scope of the working group, but the group
works on the following:

- Informational applicability statement that analyzes the issues
involved with this approach and characterizes the contexts in which such
use is or is not appropriate.

- The working group will determine if protocol extensions are required
between the Proxy Mobile IPv6 network nodes (MAGs and LMAs) to support
the ability for a single host interface to transmit packets over
different media and the ability to distribute specific traffic flows on
different media components of that single interface. The relevant
protocol extensions will be developed as necessary. The WG will assume
that there the host has an interface that is capable of employing
multiple media.

Radius Extensions to PMIP6: In order to enable network based mobility
using PMIP6, the policy profile needs to signal a set of attributes and
policies to the MAG and LMA. New Radius attributes need to be specified
that are relevant to PMIP6 based mobility. This work item will specify
Radius extensions and attributes specific to PMIP6.

The work in this charter is entirely internal to the network and does
not affect host IP stack operation in any way (except perhaps through
impacting packet forwarding capacity visible to the hosts). The working
group is not allowed to specify new IP layer protocol mechanisms to
signal mobility related events between the host and the network.

The proposed activity will be complementary to the existing IETF Working
Groups, notably the NETLMM and MEXT WGs. The NETEXT working group will
also act as the primary forum where new extensions on top of the Proxy
Mobile IPv6 protocol can be developed. The addition of such new
extensions to the working group involves addition of the extension to
this charter through the normal rechartering process.

Goals and Milestones:

May 2009 WG chartered
Jul 2009 Initial WG draft on Bulk Refresh Jul 2009 Decision on the
inclusion of possible additional work items Sep 2009 Initial WG draft on
LMA Redirection Sep 2009 Initial WG draft on Localized Routing Dec 2009
Submit Bulk Refresh to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC
Jan 2010 Submit LMA Redirection to IESG for publication as a Proposed
Standard RFC Mar 2010 Initial WG document on RADIUS extensions to PMIP6
Apr 2010 Submit Localized Routing to IESG for publication as a Proposed
Standard RFC May 2010 Initial WG document on Applicability Statement on
Multiple Media on One Interface Jun 2010 WG decision on what Proxy
Mobile IPv6 support is needed to support multiple media on one interface
Sep 2010 Initial WG document(s) on Proxy Mobile IPv6 Extensions to
Support Multiple Media on One Interface Oct 2010 Submit RADIUS
extensions to PMIP6 to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard Dec
2010 Submit Applicability Statement on Multiple Media on One Interface
to IESG for publication as Informational RFC Feb 2011 Submit Proxy
Mobile IPv6 Extensions to Support Multiple Media on One Interface for
publication as Proposed Standard RFC(s)