Reducing Inconsistent Context Problem on Providing Internet - - PDF document

▶
reducing inconsistent context problem on providing
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Reducing Inconsistent Context Problem on Providing Internet - - PDF document

Aug 01, 2023 167 likes •278 views

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department (By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU ) Reducing Inconsistent Context Problem on Providing Internet Connectivity for Mobile

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Johannes Kepler University Linz, Department of Telecooperation EuroFGI Community : Participant No. 4 (TK/JKU) Sponsors : ÖAD (Austrian Exchange Service) EuroNGI/FGI TK/JKU

Reducing Inconsistent Context Problem

  • n Providing Internet Connectivity for

Mobile Ad Hoc Networks

by Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis {quanle, gk}@tk.uni-linz.ac.at (EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2008, Barcelona, SPAIN)

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 2/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Contents

  • A Review on existing mechanisms in Internet

Mobility Management

– IP Mobility Management – IP Mobility Management over WLAN (1-Hop)

  • Needing functions on Internet connectivity for MANETs

– IP Mobility Management over MANET (Multi-Hop)

  • Discovering problems on Internet gateway

forwarding strategies for MANETs & Solutions

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 3/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Review IP Mobility Management [MIPv4] (1/4)

Internet Domain_3 Domain_1

Router/FA Router/FA Router/HA Correspondent Node (CN) Mobility (1) (2) (2) (2) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (4) (4) (4) (5) (5) (6) (6) (1): MN moves to a new domain (2): MN gets & registers its new CoA with its HA (3): MN sends data directly to CN (4): CN sends data to MN indirectly via MN’s HA Mobile Node (MN)

Domain_2

(5): MN’s HA tunnels data to MN’s FA (6): MN’s FA delivers data to MN

Foreign Agent Care-of Address Co-Located Care-of Address

  • C. Perkins, “IP Mobility Support for IPv4 ,” Internet Draft draft-ietf-

mip4-rfc3344bis-03.txt, Mar.2007 IETF Mobile IP WG, “Mobility for IPv4 (mipv4) Charter,” http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html.

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 4/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Review IP Mobility Management [MIPv6] (2/4)

Internet D

  • m

ain_3 D

  • m

ain_1

R

  • uter/FA

R

  • uter/FA

R

  • uter/H

A C

  • rrespondent N
  • de

(C N ) M

  • bility

(1) (2) (2) (2) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (4) (4) (4) (1): M N m

  • ves to a new

dom ain (2): M N gets & registers its new C

  • A w

ith its H A (3): M N registers its C

  • A w

ith C N M

  • bile

N

  • de (M

N )

D

  • m

ain_2

(4): M N & C N com m unicates directly each other (4) (4)

  • D. Johnson, C. Perkins, and J. Arkko, “Mobility Support in

IPv6 ,” rfc3775.txt, Jun.2004. IETF Mobile IPv6 WG, “Mobility for IPv6 (mipv6) Charter,” http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip6-charter.html.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 5/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Review IP Mobility Management [FMIPv6] (3/4)

Internet (IPv6) Domain_3

Router/HA Previous Access Router (pAR) New Access Router (nAR) Mobility F-BAck Binding Update (BU)/ Binding Acknowledgement (BA) F-BU F-BU Mobile Node (MN)

Domain_2 Home Network Domain_1

F-BAck F-BAck F-BAck BU/BA BU/BA F-NA F-NA Tunnel

  • R. Koodli, “Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6,” rfc4068.txt, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4068.txt,

Jul.2005.

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 6/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Review IP Mobility Management over WLAN (4/4)

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 7/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Needing functions on Internet connectivity for MANETs (1/5)

  • MANET node location determination
  • Internet gateway discovery
  • The metrics for Internet gateway selection
  • Establishing and maintaining Internet gateway

forwarding strategies

  • Addressing configuration scheme for MANET node
  • Handoff style

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 8/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Needing functions on Internet connectivity for MANETs (2/5)

  • MANET node location determination

– Using network prefix

  • MANET node must be assigned a global unicast IP address
  • MANET node address is topologically correct

– Using routing table

  • for only MANETs using proactive ad-hoc routing protocols

– Using flooding route request (RREQ) & route reply (RREP)

  • for only MANETs using reactive ad-hoc routing protocols

– Using Internet gateway

  • In response to a RREQ, sending a proxy RREP to signal it can

route to a requested destination

– Keeping a list of currently known active nodes (visitor list) – Pinging destination on the IGW network interface attaching to the Internet – Flooding the MANET with a new RREQ

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 9/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Needing functions on Internet connectivity for MANETs (3/5)

  • Internet gateway discovery

– Proactive [IGW broadcasting agent/router advertisement] – Reactive [MANET node sending agent/router solicitation] – Hybrid (fixed or adaptive broadcast radius)

  • The metrics for Internet gateway selection

– Shortest hop-count to the nearest IGW – Load-balancing for intra-MANET traffic

  • Via different immediate MANET nodes

– Load-balancing for inter-MANET traffic

  • Via different Internet gateways

– Service class: depend on the service classes provided and supported by each IGW – Euclidean distance: distance (space or hop-count) between the MANET node and the IGW – Hybrid: a combination of some of above metrics Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 10/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Needing functions on Internet connectivity for MANETs (4/5)

  • Establishing and maintaining Internet gateway

forwarding strategies

– For inter-MANET/Internet traffic/routing/forwarding

  • Using default routes
  • Using tunnelling (encapsulation)
  • Using half-tunnelling
  • Using source routing
  • Spanning tree rooted at the IGW

– For intra-MANET traffic/routing/forwarding

  • Proactive (or table-driven)
  • Reactive (or on-demand)
  • Hybrid/Hierarchical (clustering)
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 11/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Needing functions on Internet connectivity for MANETs (5/5)

  • Addressing configuration scheme for MANET node

– Topological correctly

  • Require each MANET domain (subnet) assigned a global unicast

IP subnet – Topological incorrectly

  • Either a mobile-specific routing protocol must be used in the

MANET domain,

  • Or an address mapping scheme, e.g. network address translation

(NAT), is used – Architecture

  • Centralized (e.g., stateful auto-configuration like DHCP)
  • Distributed (e.g., stateless IPv6 auto-configuration with DAD)
  • Integrating with ad-hoc routing protocol or separately
  • Handoff style

– Forced handoff – Route optimization handoff Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 12/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Review IP Mobility Management over MANET

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 13/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Discovered Problems on Internet Gateway Forwarding in MANET (1/2)

  • Inconsistent Context

– Default Routing (Type I) – Default Routing (Type II) – Default Routing (Type III) – MIPv4-FA Triangle Routing – MIPv4-FA Ingress Filtering

  • Cascading Effect in MANET

Node Location Determination

  • MIPv4-FA Traversing NAT

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 14/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Discovered Problems on Internet Gateway Forwarding in MANET (2/2)

  • Default Routing Problems (Type III)

– SENARIO I: A MANET node updates a shorter route to another IGW without re- registering the new IGW with its home agent (HA), and/or the foreign agent (FA) as well as the network address translation (NAT) device located in the visiting MANET domain. – SENARIO II: A MANET node associated with an IGW (e.g., IGW_1) forwards agent/router advertisement packet for another IGW (e.g., IGW_2). As a result, its downstream nodes can associate to the IGW_2 using it as the next-hop. However, the traffic is actually forwarded through IGW_1. – SENARIO III: A MANET node looses its association to the current IGW (e.g. a detection of link broken) and re-associates to another IGW. As a result, traffic to Internet from its downstream nodes choosing it as the next-hop to the current IGW will be forwarded via another IGW instead.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 15/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Solutions to Inconsistent Context Problem on Internet Gateway Forwarding in MANET (1/4)

Solution for SCENARIO I using Default Routes:

  • A MANET node is not allowed to

update its shorter route to another IGW, unless its current transmissions on any 2-way connections to the Internet hosts are finished, and it has already re-registered this new IGW with its home agent. This re- registration can be prepared in advance, e.g. during the data transmissions on the current connections via the old IGW. Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 16/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Solutions to Inconsistent Context Problem on Internet Gateway Forwarding in MANET (2/4)

Solution for SENARIO II using Default Routes:

  • On proactive IGW discovery, a MANET node that

does not register to any IGW is allowed to re- broadcast the received agent/router advertisement if it decides to register with this

  • IGW. Otherwise, the re-broadcasting of

agent/router advertisement is prohibited.

  • On re-active IGW discovery, a MANET node is

allowed to generate/forward an agent/router advertisement in one of the following three cases:

– It does not register to any IGW, registering it to the IGW of which the agent/router advertisement it receives, then forwarding the agent/router advertisement to the source MANET node. – It has already registered to an IGW, receiving the agent/router advertisement generating by the same IGW, then forwarding this agent/router advertisement to the source MANET node. – It has already registered to an IGW, receiving the agent/router solicitation from the source MANET node, generating itself an agent/router advertisement to the source MANET node.

  • On hybrid IGW discovery, the above rules are

applied whenever an agent/router advertisement

  • r an agent/router solicitation is received.
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 17/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Solutions to Inconsistent Context Problem on Internet Gateway Forwarding in MANET (3/4)

Solution for SENARIO III using Default Routes:

– There should be a mechanism for the MANET node detected the broken link, sending this information to its downstream MANET nodes so that these MANET nodes can re-register their new IGWs with their home

  • agents. This mechanism is

usually MANET routing protocol dependent.

  • Solution for Scenarios I, II,

III, removing Inconsistent Context Using Tunneling

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 18/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Solutions on Internet Gateway Forwarding in MANET (4/4)

  • Inconsistent Context [IP-in-IP Tunneling]

– Default Routing (Type I) – Default Routing (Type II) – Default Routing (Type III) – MIPv4-FA Triangle Routing – MIPv4-FA Ingress Filtering

  • Cascading Effect in MANET Node Location

Determination [Inserting IGW host route]

  • MIPv4-FA Traversing NAT [IP-in MIP UDP-in IP

tunneling]

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Telecooperation Department Telecooperation Department

Page 19/19

(By Quan Le Trung & Gabriele Kotsis, EuroFGI2008, Jan.16-18 2007, EuroFGI Participant No. 4 TK/JKU)

Contacting Address & References

  • Contacting Address

Quan Le-Trung, Dr.techn. Johannes Kepler University, Department of Telecooperation Altenberger Str. 69, A4040 Linz, AUSTRIA

  • Tel. +43 (0)732 2468 Ext. 9260 Fax: +43 (0)732 2468 9829

E-mail: quanle@tk.uni-linz.ac.at

  • References

1. Quan Le-Trung, and G. Kotsis, “MANETs as Access Networks for the Internet and Mobility Management,“EuroView2007, Würburg, GERMANY, Jul.23-24 2007. 2. Quan Le-Trung, “Internetworking Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks with Wireless Sensor Actor Networks and the Internet,” PhD Dissertation, TK/JKU, Linz AUSTRIA, Nov.27 2007. 3.

  • P. E. Engelstad, A. Tonnesen, A. Hafslund, and G. Egeland, “Internet Connectivity for Multi-Homed

Proactive Ad Hoc Networks,“ IEEE ICC’04, pp.4050-4056, Jun.20-24 2004. 4.

  • E. M. Royer, P. M. Melliar-Smith, and L. E. Moser, “An Analysis of the Optimal Node Density for Ad Hoc

Mobile Networks,” Proceedings of IEEE ICC, Helsinki, Finland, Jun.2001, pp.857-861. 5.

  • P. Engelstad, and G. Egeland, “NAT-Based Internet Connectivity for On-Demand Ad Hoc Networks,”

WONS’04, LNCS 2928, pp.342-356, Italy, Jan.19-23, 2004. 6.

  • H. Levkowetz, and S. Vaarala, “Mobile IP NAT/NAPT Traversal using UDP Tunneling,” Internet Draft draft-

ietf-mobileip-nat-traversal-07.txt, http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-mobileip-nat-traversal-07.txt. 7.

  • E. Ancillotti, R. Bruno, M. Conti, E. Gregori, and A. Pinzzotto, “A Layer-2 Framework for Interconnecting Ad

Hoc Networks to Fixed Internet: Test-bed Implementation and Experimental Evaluation,” The Computer Journal, ISSN 1460-2067, pp.2-22, May.11 2007. 8.

  • F. M. Abduljalil, and S. K. Bodhe, “A Survey of Integrating IP Mobility Protocols and Mobile Ad Hoc

Networks,” IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, pp.14-30, Vol.9, No.1, 1st Quarter 2007.

Thank You!