Subject: [Mip4] Paper: TTR Mobility Extensions for Core-Edge Separation Solutions

From: Robin Whittle <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:08:53 +1000

Steve Russert (Boeing) and I have finished a paper describing the
TTR (Translating Tunnel Router) Mobility extensions to several
architectures which are proposed for solving the routing scaling
problem:

  Map-encap schemes

  Translation schemes (Six/One Router, in broad principle at least)

  My two new Forwarding schemes ETR Address Forwarding (EAF IPv4)
  and Prefix Label Forwarding (PLF IPv6).

This is for a wide-area - really global - mobility system for both
IPv4 and IPv6, working with unmodified hosts as CNs.  It is very
different from normal IP mobility, but MNs will still use MIP where
it is implemented in their access networks.

     - Robin

     TTR Mobility Extensions for Core-Edge Separation Solutions
     to the Internet's Routing Scaling Problem

     Robin Whittle, Steven Russert 2008-08-25

     http://www.firstpr.com.au/ip/ivip/TTR-Mobility.pdf
     http://www.firstpr.com.au/ip/ivip/#mobile

Abstract:

   Several router-based "locator/identifier separation" solutions
   have been proposed for the Internet’s routing scaling problem,
   including the "map and encapsulate" systems LISP, APT, Ivip and
   TRRP.  These are part of a class of scalable routing solutions
   known as "core-edge separation" systems – along with similar
   proposals involving address translation and novel forwarding
   techniques rather than encapsulation.  These "core-edge
   separation" systems use a global system of Ingress Tunnel Routers
   (ITRs) near sending hosts to tunnel traffic packets to an Egress
   Tunnel Router (ETR) close to the destination network.  Existing
   mobility techniques will not take advantage of such an
   architecture.

   Here we describe a new "Translating Tunnel Router" (TTR)
   wide-area mobility architecture which builds on the ITR, ETR and
   mapping system infrastructure of the core-edge separation system.
   This TTR approach to mobility promises to provide generally
   optimal paths for all traffic whilst supporting all existing IPv4
   and IPv6 hosts as correspondent hosts, without need for upgrades.
   The mobile node (MN) retains a stable public IP address or prefix
   at all times, no matter what its current care of address(es) is
   or are.  Furthermore, MNs will be able to use any access network,
   including those which provide care-of addresses behind NAT, since
   no mobility capabilities are required in the access network.

   This TTR global mobility architecture will work equally well with
   MNs and correspondent nodes using any local Mobile IP
   architecture.  TTRs behave like ETRs to the core-edge separation
   system and somewhat resemble MIP home agents - however the MN
   chooses TTRs which are close to its access network, so there is
   no fixed home agent.

-- 
Mip4 mailing list: [email-masked]
    Web interface: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/