Subject: Re: [MOBILE-IP] QoS [diff-serv or int-serv/RSVP], and Windows MIP implementation

From: Rob Goode <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 12:12:31 +0200

Dear Foo Chun Choong,

We at NC3A have a testbed looking at emerging internet technologies,
specifically mobile IP, QoS and IPv6 and I would be interested
in some open source for these technologies on the Windows platform
as that is the most widely deployed platform in our organisation.

I would have a high interest in MIP on windows, especially in
source form, as my interest is in mobile routers (or mobile
hosts with two interfaces and IP forwarding enabled) which I
find tends not to be a standard function of most implementations,
and hence tends to require (small) source code modifications. Our
current interest is in MIP for IPv4, until MIPv6 becomes more
widely implemented.

Cheers,

Rob Goode
Principal Scientist
Communications Techniques Branch,
Communications Systems Division,
NC3A
PO Box 2501 CD
The Hague
The Netherlands

> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 21:51:24 +0800
> From: Foo Chun Choong <[email-masked]>
> Subject: [MOBILE-IP] QoS [diff-serv or int-serv/RSVP], and Windows MIP
implementation
> X-To: [email-masked]
> X-cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
> To: [email-masked]
>
> Hi Guilhem,
>
> We at NUS have done some work regarding MIPv4 and RSVP/int-serv
> integration. Some documents regarding this can be obtained from
> http://mip.ee.nus.edu.sg/slcchua.ps.gz , slcfoo.ps.gz , and slcloh.ps.gz
> The source code for the prototype implementation that we've developed here
> at NUS to support MIP/RSVP/int-serv integration can be obtained from
> http://mip.ee.nus.edu.sg/v3.0beta
>
> BTW, we would also like to gauge the interest of the MIP community regarding
an
> implementation of MIP on Windows. We have developed a prototype implementation
> of MN on Win95, and the agents on NT, and are contemplating an open-source
> release of the source code for these if there's a big enough demand for it.
>
> Regards,
> Foo Chun Choong,
> NUS Mobile IP project, http://mip.ee.nus.edu.sg
> National University of Singapore

---

From: Foo Chun Choong <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 21:10:43 +0800

Hi Rob,

My apologies for the late reply.

Yes, having the sources for these technologies (MIP, QoS, IPv6, etc) on
the Windows platform would be very valuable for us researchers.

There's source code for an IPv6 stack in NT, just check out Microsoft
Research's web site (a link to this site is also available at our NUS MIP
web page). AFAIK, no free source codes available for MIP and QoS on
Windows yet.

We're hoping to release the MIP on Windows source code developed here at
NUS this coming November.
However, due to the interest of the MIP community, we may have an earlier
pre-release of the source code, maybe in about 2-3 weeks from now. This
earlier release will be an alpha release meant for developers only, and is
not meant for actual deployment (Code currently has many limitations,
hard-coded stuff, lack of install docs, which we hope to solve in future
releases of the code). An announcement will be made on this list once we're
ready for the pre-release.

Regarding mobile routers support using MIP, what are the implementations
of MIP that you have tested so far that can support this feature?

I've actually hacked our NUS MIPv4 Linux code to support mobile networks
using MIP.
We used two methods (which work independently of each other) to provide
support for mobile networks under MIP. One method used was to make the MN
NAT/IP masq-enabled. The other method that we used was to augment the MIP
protocol, the main idea is that the HA will now additionally tunnel any
packets to the FA if it's next hop gateway is the MN. Each of the methods has
its own advantages and disadvantages, for example the first method
supports private addresses, while the second method supports the recursive use
of MIP. (Am actually hoping to write an ID to elaborate further on this if
time permits).
The code will be included in version 3.1 of Linux NUS MIPv4, which we are
planning to officially release at the end of this year.

We at NUS would also greatly welcome others in the MIP community who are
interested in joining to help in the NUS MIP project. Extra help is always
welcome 8-).

Foo Chun Choong,
The NUS Mobile IP Project, http://mip.ee.nus.edu.sg
National University of Singapore

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 12:59:27 +0900

Are there any public domain MIP v6, i.e. Mobile IP v6 implementations on Windows
(98/NT/2000) platform and on Solaris 7? The ones I am familiar are for FreeBSD (CMU
Monarch) and Linux (Lancaster), maybe they are not uptodate with the latest kernels.

--
Behcet Sarikaya
Computer Communications Lab.
The University of Aizu
Tsuruga, Ikki-machi, Aizu-wakamatsu City
Fukushima, 965-8580 Japan
Tel. +81-242-37-2559 Fax. +81-242-37-2742
Home page:  http://www.u-aizu.ac.jp/~sarikaya/
email: [email-masked]

---

From: Gopal Dommety <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 08:09:16 -0700

Check the microsoft research site. I remember to have seen an IPv6
implementation.

-Gopal

>
> --------------047943D97D9CAD90C312F042
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> --------------047943D97D9CAD90C312F042
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-2022-jp
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
> <html>
> Are there any public domain MIP v6, i.e. Mobile IP v6 implementations on
> Windows (98/NT/2000) platform and on Solaris 7? The ones I am familiar
> are for FreeBSD (CMU Monarch) and Linux (Lancaster), maybe they are not
> uptodate with the latest kernels.
> <pre>--&nbsp;
> Behcet Sarikaya
> Tel. +81-242-37-2559 Fax. +81-242-37-2742&nbsp;
> Home page:&nbsp; <A HREF="http://www.u-aizu.ac.jp/~sarikaya/">http://www.u-aizu.ac.jp/~sarikaya/</A>
> email: [email-masked]</pre>
> &nbsp;</html>
>
> --------------047943D97D9CAD90C312F042--
>

---

From: Florian Heissenhuber <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 08:25:30 +0000

On the Microsft Research site is an IPv6 stack for Windows NT / 2000
that implemtents the Mobile IP functionality of the correspondent
node. See http://www.research.microsoft.com/msripv6

I don't know any other Mobile IPv6 implementations for Windows NT /
2000.

Regards,

Florian Heissenhuber

> Monarch) and Linux (Lancaster), maybe they are not uptodate with the latest kernels.
__________________________________________________________________

Florian Heissenhuber                Phone+49 89 60883539
IABG mbH                            Fax  +49 89 60882845
Einsteinstr. 20                     [email-masked]
85521 Ottobrunn                     http://www.iabg.de
Germany

---

From: Xinhua Zhao <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 15:21:50 -0700

Foo Chun,

I have a few comments on the support for mobile routers using MIP.

I believe that RFC2002-compliant MIP implementations should be able
to support mobile networks without protocol changes. See below.

Foo Chun Choong wrote:
> protocol,

I think the Mobile IP protocol itself actually doesn't need to be augmented
at all.

If we treat the whole network behind the mobile router (which is a mobile
host) just like any other static network at the mobile router's home network
and advertise its reachability through this mobile router at the mobile
router's home network, there isn't really any need for special support.
The only difference between a "mobile network" and any other normal network
is that the router to this particular network happens to be mobile. So,
instead of using regular IP to forward packets to a regular host in order
to reach a normal network, we need to use MIP to forward packets to the
mobile router first.

Therefore, it is still a question of how to reach a mobile node rather
than a whole "mobile network". Supporting "mobile network" is really an
issue of supporting mobile router. I don't see a need to expose to the
outside world the fact that the network is mobile other than the fact
that the router to it is actually mobile.

Of course, the above model still supports that the nodes within the
network behind the mobile router can be mobile. Again, no special
changes are required here. The fact that the care-of address is in a
"mobile network" just makes no difference.

My view is that current MIP implementations that are RFC 2002 compliant
should be able to support mobile routers, hence "mobile networks".
The only tricky thing is in the mobile node implementation. It should
enable a mobile node to act as a regular node (maintaining regular
routing table etc.) for certain traffic instead of simply behaving as a
host away from home which then blindly forwards all packets through an FA.
This support of duality for mobile nodes has actually been a focus of
MosquitoNet Mobile IP implementation we have been experimenting here,
though not specifically geared towards supporting mobile networks.

Best regards,

Xinhua

===========================================================
Xinhua Zhao              MosquitoNet Mobile Computing Group
Room 416, Gates Building 4A            [email-masked]
Stanford University                    phone: (650)723-9427
Stanford, CA 94305                     fax:   (650)725-2588

> the main idea is that the HA will now additionally tunnel any