Re: [netext] Security question on anycast mode of draft-ietf-netext-redirect-01

Xiaoyan Jiang <jxyswallow@gmail.com> Fri, 07 May 2010 07:46 UTC

Return-Path: <jxyswallow@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A01C73A6AD3 for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 00:46:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.637
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.637 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.454, BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bBH+wDpnHdgH for <netext@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2010 00:46:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f200.google.com (mail-pz0-f200.google.com [209.85.222.200]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217343A6927 for <netext@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 May 2010 00:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk38 with SMTP id 38so395983pzk.31 for <netext@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 May 2010 00:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=hWdux1dYetVdRQBf5SMGCKNhF3PK5aBlnLirZWus4d0=; b=V9Kxn8L74LIi+2EMxPPx46juguwgDygyN54w1SP4JPonk61Xw0b2vyCeVLMsBqIIbG ZYXN6O4NWHW57uKbgUnudMtbj9JWuFvZcp5QvdSU+mPoceO7WXo7vUANWsAFHl2ryWFI S95+IW+2fDeJoL43fB22X7yVQFchgfogT/8g0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=e6AtAzzHPgFlgXCGDAScaphYQri07ZpxegTaFKj9vXwKRvaDejExtsT7WO5nFopzrs UtEzlyWQY4y4wqThf4sSsKGHTK3s9eWKhikPc/idZXbBrbMgWKXu131L/Z6+fq2g6DQs zq3wR/syTkh219/rBzNIfo/CiZqpP8xAkD1ac=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.143.24.24 with SMTP id b24mr2786132wfj.180.1273218369070; Fri, 07 May 2010 00:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.158.2 with HTTP; Fri, 7 May 2010 00:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BA360B83-8624-4205-83B7-A6AD40F7EB40@gmail.com>
References: <x2i8b78dd8b1005070020i6637bc0al753852a3bd3db8ec@mail.gmail.com> <BA360B83-8624-4205-83B7-A6AD40F7EB40@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 15:46:09 +0800
Message-ID: <l2p8b78dd8b1005070046tbcbc5adfqe7bc4857b582fd80@mail.gmail.com>
From: Xiaoyan Jiang <jxyswallow@gmail.com>
To: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636e0a6ae9c26210485fc406b"
Cc: netext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netext] Security question on anycast mode of draft-ietf-netext-redirect-01
X-BeenThere: netext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discusion of extensions to network mobility protocol, i.e PMIP6. " <netext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netext>
List-Post: <mailto:netext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext>, <mailto:netext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 07:46:31 -0000

2010/5/7 jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>

> Hi,
>
> On May 7, 2010, at 10:20 AM, Xiaoyan Jiang wrote:
>
> > Hi   Jouni
> >
> > When there are multiple LMAs in the same PMIP damain, how are the LMAs
> associated with each other? And, from the MAG's perspective, what' s the
> difference between the LMAs?
>
> Associated with each other? I don't really understand the question. Those
> LMAs are within the same Redirection Domain and under the same
> administration. This does not really differentiate from any anycast
> deployment.
>
> Ok, I know, it is like the anycast deployment.


> From a MAG point of view, when using anycast addressing, it sees no
> difference between LMAs. When runtime assignment takes place, the MAG learns
> the individual LMA that was picked up. The MAG will eventually have a
> separate SA with each individual LMA (either dynamically or manually
> established).
>

I mean when MAG selects LMA for MN to register, it just considers the load
factor or there are other factors, such as the different LMA provides
different service?

Xiaoyan Jiang


> - Jouni
>
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> > > o  LMAs with multiple IP addresses: a cluster of LMAs or a blade
> > >      architecture LMA may appear to the routing system as multiple LMAs
> > >     with separate unicast IP addresses.  A MAG can initially select
> > >      any of those LMA IP addresses as the LMA Address using e.g., DNS-
> > >      and AAA-based solutions.  However, MAG's initial selection may be
> > >      suboptimal from the LMA point of view and immediate redirection to
> > >      a "proper LMA" would be needed.  The LMA could use [RFC5142] based
> > >      approach but that would imply unnecessary setting up of a mobility
> > >      session in a "wrong LMA" with associated backend support system
> > >      interactions, involve additional signaling between the MAG and the
> > >      LMA, and re-establishing mobility session to the new LMA again
> > >      with associated signaling.
> >
> > Xiaoyan Jiang
> >
>
>