Re: [6lowpan] MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN (Ricardo Silva)

[Ricardo Silva <[e-mail]>]

Dear All,
  I am sending our draft about mobility in lowPANs. It would be great  
if you could send me your feedback.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/draft-silva-6lowpan-mipv6/

Best regards,

Ricardo Mendão Silva

Laboratory of Telecommunications and Telematic
Department of Informatics Engineering
University of Coimbra
PORTUGAL



On May 25, 2009, at 7:00 PM, [e-mail] wrote:

> If you have received this digest without all the individual message
> attachments you will need to update your digest options in your list
> subscription.  To do so, go to
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>
> Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and set "Get
> MIME or Plain Text Digests?" to MIME.  You can set this option
> globally for all the list digests you receive at this point.
>
>
>
> Send 6lowpan mailing list submissions to
> 	[e-mail]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	[e-mail]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	[e-mail]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of 6lowpan digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN (Zach Shelby)
>   2. Re: MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN (Julien Abeille (jabeille))
>   3. Re: MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN (Jong-Hyouk Lee)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 16:16:27 +0300
> From: Zach Shelby <[e-mail]>
> Subject: [6lowpan] MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN
> To: 6lowpan <[e-mail]>
> Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
> On a bit of a tangent... I have been studying different ways of  
> dealing
> with mobility of 6LoWPAN nodes and networks. Extended LoWPANs provide
> some mobility support for micro-mobility, which is good. Properly
> designed applications can also deal with IP addresses changing. But  
> what
> if you would want to have a stable IP address for a 6LoWPAN node or a
> stable prefix for a whole LoWPAN?
>
> MIPv6 have several problems to be used directly by LoWPAN nodes, e.g.:
> - IP-in-IP encapsulation with the home agent
> - Security for binding management messages
> - Potentially large amounts of binding messages
> Is anyone aware of work on MIPv6 proxy mechanisms which would allow  
> e.g.
> an Edge Router to proxy MIPv6 operations on behalf of a LoWPAN node?
> Maybe revive the Foreign Agent for IPv6? ;-)
>
> NEMO is much more clearly applicable to 6LoWPAN network mobility. The
> basic NEMO protocol is a perfect match, allowing an Edge Router or  
> other
> router in the visited network to act as a Mobile Router and perform
> MIPv6 on behalf of the network. Thus maintaining constant prefixes for
> all LoWPANs under the router. I don't see route optimization to be
> necessary for NEMO used with 6LoWPAN, the performance of traffic going
> through the home agent should be fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> - Zach
>
> -- 
> http://www.sensinode.com
> http://zachshelby.org - My blog ?On the Internet of Things?
> Mobile: [phone]
>
> Zach Shelby
> Head of Research
> Sensinode Ltd.
> Kidekuja 2
> 88610 Vuokatti, FINLAND
>
> This e-mail and all attached material are confidential and may contain
> legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your system  
> without
> producing, distributing or retaining copies thereof.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 16:21:49 +0200
> From: "Julien Abeille (jabeille)" <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [6lowpan] MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN
> To: "Zach Shelby" <[e-mail]>, "6lowpan" <[e-mail]>
> Message-ID:
> 	<[e-mail]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Zach,
>
> The issue with NEMO is that if nodes move from one router to another
> (meaning the routers doing the nemo signaling), their address change.
> NEMO is made to handle mobility of the whole network behind the  
> router,
> not individual nodes moving from this network to another.
>
> What you are probably looking for is Proxy Mobile IPv6
> (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5213.txt) and in general the work behing
> done by the netlmm working group
> (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/netlmm-charter.html) and the netext
> working group (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/netext-charter.html).
>
> Best,
> Julien
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
> Behalf Of Zach Shelby
> Sent: lundi 25 mai 2009 15:16
> To: 6lowpan
> Subject: [6lowpan] MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN
>
> Hi,
>
> On a bit of a tangent... I have been studying different ways of  
> dealing
> with mobility of 6LoWPAN nodes and networks. Extended LoWPANs provide
> some mobility support for micro-mobility, which is good. Properly
> designed applications can also deal with IP addresses changing. But  
> what
> if you would want to have a stable IP address for a 6LoWPAN node or a
> stable prefix for a whole LoWPAN?
>
> MIPv6 have several problems to be used directly by LoWPAN nodes, e.g.:
> - IP-in-IP encapsulation with the home agent
> - Security for binding management messages
> - Potentially large amounts of binding messages Is anyone aware of  
> work
> on MIPv6 proxy mechanisms which would allow e.g.
> an Edge Router to proxy MIPv6 operations on behalf of a LoWPAN node?
> Maybe revive the Foreign Agent for IPv6? ;-)
>
> NEMO is much more clearly applicable to 6LoWPAN network mobility. The
> basic NEMO protocol is a perfect match, allowing an Edge Router or  
> other
> router in the visited network to act as a Mobile Router and perform
> MIPv6 on behalf of the network. Thus maintaining constant prefixes for
> all LoWPANs under the router. I don't see route optimization to be
> necessary for NEMO used with 6LoWPAN, the performance of traffic going
> through the home agent should be fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> - Zach
>
> --
> http://www.sensinode.com
> http://zachshelby.org - My blog "On the Internet of Things"
> Mobile: [phone]
>
> Zach Shelby
> Head of Research
> Sensinode Ltd.
> Kidekuja 2
> 88610 Vuokatti, FINLAND
>
> This e-mail and all attached material are confidential and may contain
> legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your system  
> without
> producing, distributing or retaining copies thereof.
> _______________________________________________
> 6lowpan mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 23:41:08 +0900
> From: Jong-Hyouk Lee <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [6lowpan] MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN
> To: Zach Shelby <[e-mail]>,	"Julien Abeille (jabeille)"
> 	<[e-mail]>
> Cc: 6lowpan <[e-mail]>
> Message-ID:
> 	<[e-mail]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi, all.
>
> NEMO scenarios within PMIPv6 domain have been presented in the  
> following
> document.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jhlee-netlmm-nemo-scenarios-01
>
> Hope you find useful scenarios for 6LowPAN.
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 11:21 PM, Julien Abeille (jabeille) <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Zach,
>>
>> The issue with NEMO is that if nodes move from one router to another
>> (meaning the routers doing the nemo signaling), their address change.
>> NEMO is made to handle mobility of the whole network behind the  
>> router,
>> not individual nodes moving from this network to another.
>>
>> What you are probably looking for is Proxy Mobile IPv6
>> (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5213.txt) and in general the work behing
>> done by the netlmm working group
>> (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/netlmm-charter.html) and the  
>> netext
>> working group (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/netext- 
>> charter.html).
>>
>> Best,
>> Julien
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
>> Behalf Of Zach Shelby
>> Sent: lundi 25 mai 2009 15:16
>> To: 6lowpan
>> Subject: [6lowpan] MIPv6 and 6LoWPAN
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On a bit of a tangent... I have been studying different ways of  
>> dealing
>> with mobility of 6LoWPAN nodes and networks. Extended LoWPANs provide
>> some mobility support for micro-mobility, which is good. Properly
>> designed applications can also deal with IP addresses changing. But  
>> what
>> if you would want to have a stable IP address for a 6LoWPAN node or a
>> stable prefix for a whole LoWPAN?
>>
>> MIPv6 have several problems to be used directly by LoWPAN nodes,  
>> e.g.:
>> - IP-in-IP encapsulation with the home agent
>> - Security for binding management messages
>> - Potentially large amounts of binding messages Is anyone aware of  
>> work
>> on MIPv6 proxy mechanisms which would allow e.g.
>> an Edge Router to proxy MIPv6 operations on behalf of a LoWPAN node?
>> Maybe revive the Foreign Agent for IPv6? ;-)
>>
>> NEMO is much more clearly applicable to 6LoWPAN network mobility. The
>> basic NEMO protocol is a perfect match, allowing an Edge Router or  
>> other
>> router in the visited network to act as a Mobile Router and perform
>> MIPv6 on behalf of the network. Thus maintaining constant prefixes  
>> for
>> all LoWPANs under the router. I don't see route optimization to be
>> necessary for NEMO used with 6LoWPAN, the performance of traffic  
>> going
>> through the home agent should be fine.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> - Zach
>>
>> --
>> http://www.sensinode.com
>> http://zachshelby.org - My blog "On the Internet of Things"
>> Mobile: [phone]
>>
>> Zach Shelby
>> Head of Research
>> Sensinode Ltd.
>> Kidekuja 2
>> 88610 Vuokatti, FINLAND
>>
>> This e-mail and all attached material are confidential and may  
>> contain
>> legally privileged information. If you are not the intended  
>> recipient,
>> please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your system  
>> without
>> producing, distributing or retaining copies thereof.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 6lowpan mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>> _______________________________________________
>> 6lowpan mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Internet Management Technology Lab, Sungkyunkwan University.
> Jong-Hyouk Lee.
>
> #email: jonghyouk (at) gmail (dot) com
> #webpage: http://hurryon.googlepages.com/
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan/attachments/20090525/29c28f21/attachment.htm 
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 6lowpan mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>
>
> End of 6lowpan Digest, Vol 52, Issue 18
> ***************************************