Problem Statement Media Independent Handover Signalling draft

Document Sample
Problem Statement Media Independent Handover Signalling draft Powered By Docstoc
					   Problem Statement: Media
Independent Handover Signalling

               E. Hepworth, G. Daley,
             S. Sreemanthula, S. Faccin

                   November 2005
      Scope of this discussion
• Related drafts have identified the need for
  mobility services to support media independent
• MIPSHOP charter proposal is to support these in
  some way
• Not clear how IETF and other bodies should split
  up the overall problem space
• Focus here is on responsibility for common
  protocol aspects rather than details of the
  individual services
Solution Components

 IS            CS             ES              …

            Transaction Semantics

         Common Protocol Functions
      (security, transport, discovery etc.)

Possible Deployments
                      Information Exchange

MN                                                            NN
                       Transport over IP

                    Information Exchange

MN                            NN                              NN
      Transport over Other               Transport over IP

      Information Exchange             Information Exchange

MN                                                            NN
        Transport over IP
                             (Proxy)     Transport over IP

Wireless Mobile         Access Network,             Somewhere else
    Nodes            including base stations
The value of a common solution
• There is a common core set of                         IS        CS         ES        …
  problems for all the different mobility
  services:                                                  Transaction Semantics

    – All services need to be able to dynamically         Common Protocol Functions
      discover “server” nodes                          (security, transport, discovery etc.)

    – For all services, there is a range of
      requirements on the common functionality.
        • e.g. secure or not, reliable or expedited
• Advantages:
    – Provides natural division of responsibility between different
    – Prevents solving of same problem incompatibly multiple times
    – Easier to develop and deploy new mobility signalling services
    – Allows possibility to evolve the common part without affecting the
      individual services as you get advances in transport and security
      protocol understanding
     Role of IETF?

IS        CS          ES         …       ?

       Transaction Semantics

     Common Protocol Functions       IETF

• Proposal is to split the problem space into
  generic and service specific parts
  – Does this approach seem feasible?
• If so, which areas would the IETF be
  prepared to consider?
  – Some parts of the problem space may already
    have solutions
  – There will be interactions with other
    standardisation groups
• The common function requirements identified so far include:
   – Discovery: providing the ability to locate nodes that support particular
     mobility services
   – Information from a trusted source: need to ensure that the information is
   – Low latency: mobility services may want to exchange data with differing
     time sensitivities
   – Reliability: mobility services may want guarantees that information will
     be delivered
   – Congestion control: need to consider head of line blocking etc.
   – Secure delivery: the information may traverse untrusted intermediate
   – Multiplexing: mobility services may share a single transport
   – Multihoming: possibility that the request response may use different