home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
Text File | 2003-06-11 | 188.7 KB | 4,428 lines |
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group C. Perkins, Editor
- Request for Comments: 2002 IBM
- Category: Standards Track October 1996
-
- IP Mobility Support
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
- Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
- improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
- Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
- and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
-
- Abstract
-
- This document specifies protocol enhancements that allow transparent
- routing of IP datagrams to mobile nodes in the Internet. Each mobile
- node is always identified by its home address, regardless of its
- current point of attachment to the Internet. While situated away
- from its home, a mobile node is also associated with a care-of
- address, which provides information about its current point of
- attachment to the Internet. The protocol provides for registering
- the care-of address with a home agent. The home agent sends
- datagrams destined for the mobile node through a tunnel to the care-
- of address. After arriving at the end of the tunnel, each datagram
- is then delivered to the mobile node.
-
- Table of Contents
-
- 1. Introduction 3
- 1.1. Protocol Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
- 1.2. Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
- 1.3. Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
- 1.4. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
- 1.5. New Architectural Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
- 1.6. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
- 1.7. Protocol Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
- 1.8. Specification Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
- 1.9. Message Format and Protocol Extensibility . . . . . . . . 12
- 2. Agent Discovery 14
- 2.1. Agent Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
- 2.1.1. Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension . . . . . 16
- 2.1.2. Prefix-Lengths Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
- 2.1.3. One-byte Padding Extension . . . . . . . . . . . 19
- 2.2. Agent Solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
- 2.3. Foreign Agent and Home Agent Considerations . . . . . . . 19
- 2.3.1. Advertised Router Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . 20
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 1]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 2.3.2. Sequence Numbers and Rollover Handling . . . . . 21
- 2.4. Mobile Node Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
- 2.4.1. Registration Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
- 2.4.2. Move Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
- 2.4.3. Returning Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
- 2.4.4. Sequence Numbers and Rollover Handling . . . . . 24
- 3. Registration 24
- 3.1. Registration Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
- 3.2. Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
- 3.3. Registration Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
- 3.4. Registration Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
- 3.5. Registration Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
- 3.5.1. Computing Authentication Extension Values . . . . 32
- 3.5.2. Mobile-Home Authentication Extension . . . . . . 33
- 3.5.3. Mobile-Foreign Authentication Extension . . . . . 33
- 3.5.4. Foreign-Home Authentication Extension . . . . . . 34
- 3.6. Mobile Node Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
- 3.6.1. Sending Registration Requests . . . . . . . . . . 36
- 3.6.2. Receiving Registration Replies . . . . . . . . . 40
- 3.6.3. Registration Retransmission . . . . . . . . . . . 42
- 3.7. Foreign Agent Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
- 3.7.1. Configuration and Registration Tables . . . . . . 44
- 3.7.2. Receiving Registration Requests . . . . . . . . . 44
- 3.7.3. Receiving Registration Replies . . . . . . . . . 47
- 3.8. Home Agent Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
- 3.8.1. Configuration and Registration Tables . . . . . . 49
- 3.8.2. Receiving Registration Requests . . . . . . . . . 49
- 3.8.3. Sending Registration Replies . . . . . . . . . . 53
- 4. Routing Considerations 55
- 4.1. Encapsulation Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
- 4.2. Unicast Datagram Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
- 4.2.1. Mobile Node Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 56
- 4.2.2. Foreign Agent Considerations . . . . . . . . . . 57
- 4.2.3. Home Agent Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
- 4.3. Broadcast Datagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
- 4.4. Multicast Datagram Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
- 4.5. Mobile Routers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
- 4.6. ARP, Proxy ARP, and Gratuitous ARP . . . . . . . . . . . 62
- 5. Security Considerations 66
- 5.1. Message Authentication Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
- 5.2. Areas of Security Concern in this Protocol . . . . . . . 66
- 5.3. Key Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
- 5.4. Picking Good Random Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
- 5.5. Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
- 5.6. Replay Protection for Registration Requests . . . . . . . 68
- 5.6.1. Replay Protection using Timestamps . . . . . . . 68
- 5.6.2. Replay Protection using Nonces . . . . . . . . . 69
- 6. Acknowledgments 71
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 2]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- A. Patent Issues 72
- A.1. IBM Patent #5,159,592 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
- A.2. IBM Patent #5,148,479 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
- B. Link-Layer Considerations 73
- C. TCP Considerations 73
- C.1. TCP Timers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
- C.2. TCP Congestion Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
- D. Example Scenarios 74
- D.1. Registering with a Foreign Agent Care-of Address . . . . 74
- D.2. Registering with a Co-Located Care-of Address . . . . . . 75
- D.3. Deregistration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
- E. Applicability of Prefix Lengths Extension 76
- Editor's Address 79
-
- 1. Introduction
-
- IP version 4 assumes that a node's IP address uniquely identifies the
- node's point of attachment to the Internet. Therefore, a node must
- be located on the network indicated by its IP address in order to
- receive datagrams destined to it; otherwise, datagrams destined to
- the node would be undeliverable. For a node to change its point of
- attachment without losing its ability to communicate, currently one
- of the two following mechanisms must typically be employed:
-
- a) the node must change its IP address whenever it changes its
- point of attachment, or
-
- b) host-specific routes must be propagated throughout much of
- the Internet routing fabric.
-
- Both of these alternatives are often unacceptable. The first makes
- it impossible for a node to maintain transport and higher-layer
- connections when the node changes location. The second has obvious
- and severe scaling problems, especially relevant considering the
- explosive growth in sales of notebook (mobile) computers.
-
- A new, scalable, mechanism is required for accommodating node
- mobility within the Internet. This document defines such a
- mechanism, which enables nodes to change their point of attachment to
- the Internet without changing their IP address.
-
- 1.1. Protocol Requirements
-
- A mobile node must be able to communicate with other nodes after
- changing its link-layer point of attachment to the Internet, yet
- without changing its IP address.
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 3]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- A mobile node must be able to communicate with other nodes that do
- not implement these mobility functions. No protocol enhancements are
- required in hosts or routers that are not acting as any of the new
- architectural entities introduced in Section 1.5.
-
- All messages used to update another node as to the location of a
- mobile node must be authenticated in order to protect against remote
- redirection attacks.
-
- 1.2. Goals
-
- The link by which a mobile node is directly attached to the Internet
- may often be a wireless link. This link may thus have a
- substantially lower bandwidth and higher error rate than traditional
- wired networks. Moreover, mobile nodes are likely to be battery
- powered, and minimizing power consumption is important. Therefore,
- the number of administrative messages sent over the link by which a
- mobile node is directly attached to the Internet should be minimized,
- and the size of these messages should be kept as small as is
- reasonably possible.
-
- 1.3. Assumptions
-
- The protocols defined in this document place no additional
- constraints on the assignment of IP addresses. That is, a mobile
- node can be assigned an IP address by the organization that owns the
- machine.
-
- This protocol assumes that mobile nodes will generally not change
- their point of attachment to the Internet more frequently than once
- per second.
-
- This protocol assumes that IP unicast datagrams are routed based on
- the destination address in the datagram header (and not, for example,
- by source address).
-
- 1.4. Applicability
-
- Mobile IP is intended to enable nodes to move from one IP subnet to
- another. It is just as suitable for mobility across homogeneous
- media as it is for mobility across heterogeneous media. That is,
- Mobile IP facilitates node movement from one Ethernet segment to
- another as well as it accommodates node movement from an Ethernet
- segment to a wireless LAN, as long as the mobile node's IP address
- remains the same after such a movement.
-
- One can think of Mobile IP as solving the "macro" mobility management
- problem. It is less well suited for more "micro" mobility management
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 4]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- applications -- for example, handoff amongst wireless transceivers,
- each of which covers only a very small geographic area. As long as
- node movement does not occur between points of attachment on
- different IP subnets, link-layer mechanisms for mobility (i.e.,
- link-layer handoff) may offer faster convergence and far less
- overhead than Mobile IP.
-
- 1.5. New Architectural Entities
-
- Mobile IP introduces the following new functional entities:
-
- Mobile Node
-
- A host or router that changes its point of attachment from one
- network or subnetwork to another. A mobile node may change its
- location without changing its IP address; it may continue to
- communicate with other Internet nodes at any location using its
- (constant) IP address, assuming link-layer connectivity to a
- point of attachment is available.
-
- Home Agent
-
- A router on a mobile node's home network which tunnels
- datagrams for delivery to the mobile node when it is away from
- home, and maintains current location information for the mobile
- node.
-
- Foreign Agent
-
- A router on a mobile node's visited network which provides
- routing services to the mobile node while registered. The
- foreign agent detunnels and delivers datagrams to the mobile
- node that were tunneled by the mobile node's home agent. For
- datagrams sent by a mobile node, the foreign agent may serve as
- a default router for registered mobile nodes.
-
- A mobile node is given a long-term IP address on a home network.
- This home address is administered in the same way as a "permanent" IP
- address is provided to a stationary host. When away from its home
- network, a "care-of address" is associated with the mobile node and
- reflects the mobile node's current point of attachment. The mobile
- node uses its home address as the source address of all IP datagrams
- that it sends, except where otherwise described in this document for
- datagrams sent for certain mobility management functions (e.g., as in
- Section 3.6.1.1).
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 5]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 1.6. Terminology
-
- This document frequently uses the following terms:
-
- Agent Advertisement
- An advertisement message constructed by attaching a
- special Extension to a router advertisement [4] message.
-
- Care-of Address
- The termination point of a tunnel toward a mobile node,
- for datagrams forwarded to the mobile node while it is
- away from home. The protocol can use two different types
- of care-of address: a "foreign agent care-of address" is
- an address of a foreign agent with which the mobile node
- is registered, and a "co-located care-of address" is an
- externally obtained local address which the mobile node
- has associated with one of its own network interfaces.
-
- Correspondent Node
- A peer with which a mobile node is communicating. A
- correspondent node may be either mobile or stationary.
-
- Foreign Network
- Any network other than the mobile node's Home Network.
-
- Home Address
- An IP address that is assigned for an extended period of
- time to a mobile node. It remains unchanged regardless
- of where the node is attached to the Internet.
-
- Home Network
- A network, possibly virtual, having a network prefix
- matching that of a mobile node's home address. Note that
- standard IP routing mechanisms will deliver datagrams
- destined to a mobile node's Home Address to the mobile
- node's Home Network.
-
- Link A facility or medium over which nodes can communicate at
- the link layer. A link underlies the network layer.
-
- Link-Layer Address
- The address used to identify an endpoint of some
- communication over a physical link. Typically, the
- Link-Layer address is an interface's Media Access Control
- (MAC) address.
-
- Mobility Agent
- Either a home agent or a foreign agent.
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 6]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Mobility Binding
- The association of a home address with a care-of address,
- along with the remaining lifetime of that association.
-
- Mobility Security Association
- A collection of security contexts, between a pair
- of nodes, which may be applied to Mobile IP protocol
- messages exchanged between them. Each context indicates
- an authentication algorithm and mode (Section 5.1), a
- secret (a shared key, or appropriate public/private
- key pair), and a style of replay protection in use
- (Section 5.6).
-
- Node A host or a router.
-
- Nonce A randomly chosen value, different from previous choices,
- inserted in a message to protect against replays.
-
- Security Parameter Index (SPI)
- An index identifying a security context between a pair
- of nodes among the contexts available in the Mobility
- Security Association. SPI values 0 through 255 are
- reserved and MUST NOT be used in any Mobility Security
- Association.
-
- Tunnel The path followed by a datagram while it is encapsulated.
- The model is that, while it is encapsulated, a datagram
- is routed to a knowledgeable decapsulating agent, which
- decapsulates the datagram and then correctly delivers it
- to its ultimate destination.
-
- Virtual Network
- A network with no physical instantiation beyond a router
- (with a physical network interface on another network).
- The router (e.g., a home agent) generally advertises
- reachability to the virtual network using conventional
- routing protocols.
-
- Visited Network
- A network other than a mobile node's Home Network, to
- which the mobile node is currently connected.
-
- Visitor List
- The list of mobile nodes visiting a foreign agent.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 7]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 1.7. Protocol Overview
-
- The following support services are defined for Mobile IP:
-
- Agent Discovery
- Home agents and foreign agents may advertise their
- availability on each link for which they provide service.
- A newly arrived mobile node can send a solicitation on
- the link to learn if any prospective agents are present.
-
- Registration
- When the mobile node is away from home, it registers
- its care-of address with its home agent. Depending on
- its method of attachment, the mobile node will register
- either directly with its home agent, or through a foreign
- agent which forwards the registration to the home agent.
-
- The following steps provide a rough outline of operation of the
- Mobile IP protocol:
-
- - Mobility agents (i.e., foreign agents and home agents) advertise
- their presence via Agent Advertisement messages (Section 2). A
- mobile node may optionally solicit an Agent Advertisement message
- from any locally attached mobility agents through an Agent
- Solicitation message.
-
- - A mobile node receives these Agent Advertisements and determines
- whether it is on its home network or a foreign network.
-
- - When the mobile node detects that it is located on its home
- network, it operates without mobility services. If returning
- to its home network from being registered elsewhere, the mobile
- node deregisters with its home agent, through exchange of a
- Registration Request and Registration Reply message with it.
-
- - When a mobile node detects that it has moved to a foreign
- network, it obtains a care-of address on the foreign network.
- The care-of address can either be determined from a foreign
- agent's advertisements (a foreign agent care-of address), or by
- some external assignment mechanism such as DHCP [6] (a co-located
- care-of address).
-
- - The mobile node operating away from home then registers its
- new care-of address with its home agent through exchange of a
- Registration Request and Registration Reply message with it,
- possibly via a foreign agent (Section 3).
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 8]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- - Datagrams sent to the mobile node's home address are intercepted
- by its home agent, tunneled by the home agent to the mobile
- node's care-of address, received at the tunnel endpoint (either
- at a foreign agent or at the mobile node itself), and finally
- delivered to the mobile node (Section 4.2.3).
-
- - In the reverse direction, datagrams sent by the mobile node
- are generally delivered to their destination using standard IP
- routing mechanisms, not necessarily passing through the home
- agent.
-
- When away from home, Mobile IP uses protocol tunneling to hide a
- mobile node's home address from intervening routers between its home
- network and its current location. The tunnel terminates at the
- mobile node's care-of address. The care-of address must be an
- address to which datagrams can be delivered via conventional IP
- routing. At the care-of address, the original datagram is removed
- from the tunnel and delivered to the mobile node.
-
- Mobile IP provides two alternative modes for the acquisition of a
- care-of address:
-
- - A "foreign agent care-of address" is a care-of address provided
- by a foreign agent through its Agent Advertisement messages. In
- this case, the care-of address is an IP address of the foreign
- agent. In this mode, the foreign agent is the endpoint of the
- tunnel and, upon receiving tunneled datagrams, decapsulates them
- and delivers the inner datagram to the mobile node. This mode
- of acquisition is preferred because it allows many mobile nodes
- to share the same care-of address and therefore does not place
- unnecessary demands on the already limited IPv4 address space.
-
- - A "co-located care-of address" is a care-of address acquired
- by the mobile node as a local IP address through some external
- means, which the mobile node then associates with one of its own
- network interfaces. The address may be dynamically acquired as
- a temporary address by the mobile node such as through DHCP [6],
- or may be owned by the mobile node as a long-term address for its
- use only while visiting some foreign network. Specific external
- methods of acquiring a local IP address for use as a co-located
- care-of address are beyond the scope of this document. When
- using a co-located care-of address, the mobile node serves as the
- endpoint of the tunnel and itself performs decapsulation of the
- datagrams tunneled to it.
-
- The mode of using a co-located care-of address has the advantage that
- it allows a mobile node to function without a foreign agent, for
- example, in networks that have not yet deployed a foreign agent.
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 9]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- It does, however, place additional burden on the IPv4 address space
- because it requires a pool of addresses within the foreign network to
- be made available to visiting mobile nodes. It is difficult to
- efficiently maintain pools of addresses for each subnet that may
- permit mobile nodes to visit.
-
- It is important to understand the distinction between the care-of
- address and the foreign agent functions. The care-of address is
- simply the endpoint of the tunnel. It might indeed be an address of
- a foreign agent (a foreign agent care-of address), but it might
- instead be an address temporarily acquired by the mobile node (a co-
- located care-of address). A foreign agent, on the other hand, is a
- mobility agent that provides services to mobile nodes. See Sections
- 3.7 and 4.2.2 for additional details.
-
- A home agent MUST be able to attract and intercept datagrams that are
- destined to the home address of any of its registered mobile nodes.
- Using the proxy and gratuitous ARP mechanisms described in Section
- 4.6, this requirement can be satisfied if the home agent has a
- network interface on the link indicated by the mobile node's home
- address. Other placements of the home agent relative to the mobile
- node's home location MAY also be possible using other mechanisms for
- intercepting datagrams destined to the mobile node's home address.
- Such placements are beyond the scope of this document.
-
- Similarly, a mobile node and a prospective or current foreign agent
- MUST be able to exchange datagrams without relying on standard IP
- routing mechanisms; that is, those mechanisms which make forwarding
- decisions based upon the network-prefix of the destination address in
- the IP header. This requirement can be satisfied if the foreign
- agent and the visiting mobile node have an interface on the same
- link. In this case, the mobile node and foreign agent simply bypass
- their normal IP routing mechanism when sending datagrams to each
- other, addressing the underlying link-layer packets to their
- respective link-layer addresses. Other placements of the foreign
- agent relative to the mobile node MAY also be possible using other
- mechanisms to exchange datagrams between these nodes, but such
- placements are beyond the scope of this document.
-
- If a mobile node is using a co-located care-of address (as described
- in (b) above), the mobile node MUST be located on the link identified
- by the network prefix of this care-of address. Otherwise, datagrams
- destined to the care-of address would be undeliverable.
-
- For example, the figure below illustrates the routing of datagrams to
- and from a mobile node away from home, once the mobile node has
- registered with its home agent. In the figure below, the mobile node
- is using a foreign agent care-of address:
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 10]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 2) Datagram is intercepted 3) Datagram is
- by home agent and detunneled and
- is tunneled to the delivered to the
- care-of address. mobile node.
-
- +-----+ +-------+ +------+
- |home | =======> |foreign| ------> |mobile|
- |agent| | agent | <------ | node |
- +-----+ +-------+ +------+
- 1) Datagram to /|\ /
- mobile node | / 4) For datagrams sent by the
- arrives on | / mobile node, standard IP
- home network | / routing delivers each to its
- via standard | |_ destination. In this figure,
- IP routing. +----+ the foreign agent is the
- |host| mobile node's default router.
- +----+
-
- 1.8. Specification Language
-
- In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
- of the specification. These words are often capitalized.
-
- MUST This word, or the adjective "required", means that
- the definition is an absolute requirement of the
- specification.
-
- MUST NOT This phrase means that the definition is an absolute
- prohibition of the specification.
-
- SHOULD This word, or the adjective "recommended", means
- that, in some circumstances, valid reasons may exist
- to ignore this item, but the full implications must
- be understood and carefully weighed before choosing
- a different course. Unexpected results may result
- otherwise.
-
- MAY This word, or the adjective "optional", means that this
- item is one of an allowed set of alternatives. An
- implementation which does not include this option MUST
- be prepared to interoperate with another implementation
- which does include the option.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 11]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- silently discard
- The implementation discards the datagram without
- further processing, and without indicating an error
- to the sender. The implementation SHOULD provide the
- capability of logging the error, including the contents
- of the discarded datagram, and SHOULD record the event
- in a statistics counter.
-
- 1.9. Message Format and Protocol Extensibility
-
- Mobile IP defines a set of new control messages, sent with UDP [17]
- using well-known port number 434. Currently, the following two
- message types are defined:
-
- 1 Registration Request
- 3 Registration Reply
-
- Up-to-date values for the message types for Mobile IP control
- messages are specified in the most recent "Assigned Numbers" [20].
-
- In addition, for Agent Discovery, Mobile IP makes use of the existing
- Router Advertisement and Router Solicitation messages defined for
- ICMP Router Discovery [4].
-
- Mobile IP defines a general Extension mechanism to allow optional
- information to be carried by Mobile IP control messages or by ICMP
- Router Discovery messages. Each of these Extensions (with one
- exception) is encoded in the following Type-Length-Value format:
-
- 0 1 2
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
- | Type | Length | Data ...
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
-
- Type Indicates the particular type of Extension.
-
- Length Indicates the length (in bytes) of the data field within
- this Extension. The length does NOT include the Type and
- Length bytes.
-
- Data The particular data associated with this Extension. This
- field may be zero or more bytes in length. The format
- and length of the data field is determined by the type
- and length fields.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 12]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Extensions allow variable amounts of information to be carried within
- each datagram. The end of the list of Extensions is indicated by the
- total length of the IP datagram.
-
- Two separately maintained sets of numbering spaces, from which
- Extension Type values are allocated, are used in Mobile IP:
-
- - The first set consists of those Extensions which may appear only
- in Mobile IP control messages (those sent to and from UDP port
- number 434). Currently, the following Types are defined for
- Extensions appearing in Mobile IP control messages:
-
- 32 Mobile-Home Authentication
- 33 Mobile-Foreign Authentication
- 34 Foreign-Home Authentication
-
- - The second set consists of those extensions which may appear only
- in ICMP Router Discovery messages [4]. Currently, Mobile IP
- defines the following Types for Extensions appearing in ICMP
- Router Discovery messages:
-
- 0 One-byte Padding (encoded with no Length nor Data field)
- 16 Mobility Agent Advertisement
- 19 Prefix-Lengths
-
- Each individual Extension is described in detail in a separate
- section later in this document. Up-to-date values for these
- Extension Type numbers are specified in the most recent "Assigned
- Numbers" [20].
-
- Due to the separation (orthogonality) of these sets, it is
- conceivable that two Extensions that are defined at a later date
- could have identical Type values, so long as one of the Extensions
- may be used only in Mobile IP control messages and the other may be
- used only in ICMP Router Discovery messages.
-
- When an Extension numbered in either of these sets within the range 0
- through 127 is encountered but not recognized, the message containing
- that Extension MUST be silently discarded. When an Extension
- numbered in the range 128 through 255 is encountered which is not
- recognized, that particular Extension is ignored, but the rest of the
- Extensions and message data MUST still be processed. The Length
- field of the Extension is used to skip the Data field in searching
- for the next Extension.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 13]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 2. Agent Discovery
-
- Agent Discovery is the method by which a mobile node determines
- whether it is currently connected to its home network or to a foreign
- network, and by which a mobile node can detect when it has moved from
- one network to another. When connected to a foreign network, the
- methods specified in this section also allow the mobile node to
- determine the foreign agent care-of address being offered by each
- foreign agent on that network.
-
- Mobile IP extends ICMP Router Discovery [4] as its primary mechanism
- for Agent Discovery. An Agent Advertisement is formed by including a
- Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension in an ICMP Router
- Advertisement message (Section 2.1). An Agent Solicitation message
- is identical to an ICMP Router Solicitation, except that its IP TTL
- MUST be set to 1 (Section 2.2). This section describes the message
- formats and procedures by which mobile nodes, foreign agents, and
- home agents cooperate to realize Agent Discovery.
-
- Agent Advertisement and Agent Solicitation may not be necessary for
- link layers that already provide this functionality. The method by
- which mobile nodes establish link-layer connections with prospective
- agents is outside the scope of this document (but see Appendix B).
- The procedures described below assume that such link-layer
- connectivity has already been established.
-
- No authentication is required for Agent Advertisement and Agent
- Solicitation messages. They MAY be authenticated using the IP
- Authentication Header [1], which is unrelated to the messages
- described in this document. Further specification of the way in
- which Advertisement and Solicitation messages may be authenticated is
- outside of the scope of this document.
-
- 2.1. Agent Advertisement
-
- Agent Advertisements are transmitted by a mobility agent to advertise
- its services on a link. Mobile nodes use these advertisements to
- determine their current point of attachment to the Internet. An
- Agent Advertisement is an ICMP Router Advertisement that has been
- extended to also carry an Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension
- (Section 2.1.1) and, optionally, a Prefix-Lengths Extension (Section
- 2.1.2), One-byte Padding Extension (Section 2.1.3), or other
- Extensions that might be defined in the future.
-
- Within an Agent Advertisement message, ICMP Router Advertisement
- fields of the message are required to conform to the following
- additional specifications:
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 14]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- - Link-Layer Fields
-
- Destination Address
- The link-layer destination address of a unicast
- Agent Advertisement MUST be the same as the source
- link-layer address of the Agent Solicitation which
- prompted the Advertisement.
-
- - IP Fields
-
- TTL The TTL for all Agent Advertisements MUST be set
- to 1.
-
- Destination Address
- As specified for ICMP Router Discovery [4], the IP
- destination address of an Agent Advertisement MUST
- be either the "all systems on this link" multicast
- address (224.0.0.1) [5] or the "limited broadcast"
- address (255.255.255.255). The subnet-directed
- broadcast address of the form <prefix>.<-1> cannot be
- used since mobile nodes will not generally know the
- prefix of the foreign network.
-
- - ICMP Fields
-
- Code The Code field of the agent advertisement is
- interpreted as follows:
-
- 0 The mobility agent handles common traffic -- that
- is, it acts as a router for IP datagrams not
- necessarily related to mobile nodes.
- 16 The mobility agent does not route common traffic.
- However, all foreign agents MUST (minimally)
- forward to a default router any datagrams received
- from a registered mobile node (Section 4.2.2).
-
- Lifetime
- The maximum length of time that the Advertisement
- is considered valid in the absence of further
- Advertisements.
-
- Router Address(es)
- See Section 2.3.1 for a discussion of the addresses
- that may appear in this portion of the Agent
- Advertisement.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 15]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Num Addrs
- The number of Router Addresses advertised in this
- message. Note that in an Agent Advertisement
- message, the number of router addresses specified in
- the ICMP Router Advertisement portion of the message
- MAY be set to 0. See Section 2.3.1 for details.
-
- If sent periodically, the nominal interval at which Agent
- Advertisements are sent SHOULD be 1/3 of the advertisement Lifetime
- given in the ICMP header. This allows a mobile node to miss three
- successive advertisements before deleting the agent from its list of
- valid agents. The actual transmission time for each advertisement
- SHOULD be slightly randomized [4] in order to avoid synchronization
- and subsequent collisions with other Agent Advertisements that may be
- sent by other agents (or with other Router Advertisements sent by
- other routers). Note that this field has no relation to the
- "Registration Lifetime" field within the Mobility Agent Advertisement
- Extension defined below.
-
- 2.1.1. Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension
-
- The Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension follows the ICMP Router
- Advertisement fields. It is used to indicate that an ICMP Router
- Advertisement message is also an Agent Advertisement being sent by a
- mobility agent. The Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension is
- defined as follows:
-
- 0 1 2 3
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type | Length | Sequence Number |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Registration Lifetime |R|B|H|F|M|G|V| reserved |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | zero or more Care-of Addresses |
- | ... |
-
- Type 16
-
- Length (6 + 4*N), where N is the number of care-of addresses
- advertised.
-
- Sequence Number
- The count of Agent Advertisement messages sent since the
- agent was initialized (Section 2.3.2).
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 16]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Registration Lifetime
- The longest lifetime (measured in seconds) that this
- agent is willing to accept in any Registration Request.
- A value of 0xffff indicates infinity. This field has no
- relation to the "Lifetime" field within the ICMP Router
- Advertisement portion of the Agent Advertisement.
-
- R Registration required. Registration with this foreign
- agent (or another foreign agent on this link) is required
- rather than using a co-located care-of address.
-
- B Busy. The foreign agent will not accept registrations
- from additional mobile nodes.
-
- H Home agent. This agent offers service as a home agent
- on the link on which this Agent Advertisement message is
- sent.
-
- F Foreign agent. This agent offers service as a foreign
- agent on the link on which this Agent Advertisement
- message is sent.
-
- M Minimal encapsulation. This agent implements receiving
- tunneled datagrams that use minimal encapsulation [15].
-
- G GRE encapsulation. This agent implements receiving
- tunneled datagrams that use GRE encapsulation [8].
-
- V Van Jacobson header compression. This agent supports use
- of Van Jacobson header compression [10] over the link
- with any registered mobile node.
-
- reserved
- Sent as zero; ignored on reception.
-
- Care-of Address(es)
- The advertised foreign agent care-of address(es) provided
- by this foreign agent. An Agent Advertisement MUST
- include at least one care-of address if the 'F' bit
- is set. The number of care-of addresses present is
- determined by the Length field in the Extension.
-
- A home agent MUST always be prepared to serve the mobile nodes for
- which it is the home agent. A foreign agent may at times be too busy
- to serve additional mobile nodes; even so, it must continue to send
- Agent Advertisements, so that any mobile nodes already registered
- with it will know that they have not moved out of range of the
- foreign agent and that the foreign agent has not failed. A foreign
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 17]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- agent may indicate that it is "too busy" to allow new mobile nodes to
- register with it, by setting the 'B' bit in its Agent Advertisements.
- An Agent Advertisement message MUST NOT have the 'B' bit set if the
- 'F' bit is not also set, and at least one of the 'F' bit and the 'H'
- bit MUST be set in any Agent Advertisement message sent.
-
- When a foreign agent wishes to require registration even from those
- mobile nodes which have acquired a co-located care-of address, it
- sets the 'R' bit to one. Because this bit applies only to foreign
- agents, an agent MUST NOT set the 'R' bit to one unless the 'F' bit
- is also set to one.
-
- 2.1.2. Prefix-Lengths Extension
-
- The Prefix-Lengths Extension MAY follow the Mobility Agent
- Advertisement Extension. It is used to indicate the number of bits
- of network prefix that applies to each Router Address listed in the
- ICMP Router Advertisement portion of the Agent Advertisement. Note
- that the prefix lengths given DO NOT apply to care-of address(es)
- listed in the Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension. The Prefix-
- Lengths Extension is defined as follows:
-
- 0 1 2 3
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type | Length | Prefix Length | ....
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-
- Type 19 (Prefix-Lengths Extension)
-
- Length N, where N is the value of the Num Addrs field in
- the ICMP Router Advertisement portion of the Agent
- Advertisement.
-
- Prefix Length(s)
- The number of leading bits that define the network number
- of the corresponding Router Address listed in the ICMP
- Router Advertisement portion of the message. The prefix
- length for each Router Address is encoded as a separate
- byte, in the order that the Router Addresses are listed
- in the ICMP Router Advertisement portion of the message.
-
- See Section 2.4.2 for information about how the Prefix Lengths
- Extension MAY be used by a mobile node when determining whether it
- has moved. See Appendix E for implementation details about the use
- of this Extension.
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 18]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 2.1.3. One-byte Padding Extension
-
- Some IP protocol implementations insist upon padding ICMP messages to
- an even number of bytes. If the ICMP length of an Agent
- Advertisement is odd, this Extension MAY be included in order to make
- the ICMP length even. Note that this Extension is NOT intended to be
- a general-purpose Extension to be included in order to word- or
- long-align the various fields of the Agent Advertisement. An Agent
- Advertisement SHOULD NOT include more than one One-byte Padding
- Extension and if present, this Extension SHOULD be the last Extension
- in the Agent Advertisement.
-
- Note that unlike other Extensions used in Mobile IP, the One-byte
- Padding Extension is encoded as a single byte, with no "Length" nor
- "Data" field present. The One-byte Padding Extension is defined as
- follows:
-
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-
- Type 0 (One-byte Padding Extension)
-
- 2.2. Agent Solicitation
-
- An Agent Solicitation is identical to an ICMP Router Solicitation
- with the further restriction that the IP TTL Field MUST be set to 1.
-
- 2.3. Foreign Agent and Home Agent Considerations
-
- Any mobility agent which cannot be discovered by a link-layer
- protocol MUST send Agent Advertisements. An agent which can be
- discovered by a link-layer protocol SHOULD also implement Agent
- Advertisements. However, the Advertisements need not be sent, except
- when the site policy requires registration with the agent (i.e., when
- the 'R' bit is set), or as a response to a specific Agent
- Solicitation. All mobility agents SHOULD respond to Agent
- Solicitations.
-
- The same procedures, defaults, and constants are used in Agent
- Advertisement messages and Agent Solicitation messages as specified
- for ICMP Router Discovery [4], except that:
-
- - a mobility agent MUST limit the rate at which it sends broadcast
- or multicast Agent Advertisements; a recommended maximum rate is
- once per second, AND
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 19]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- - a mobility agent that receives a Router Solicitation MUST NOT
- require that the IP Source Address is the address of a neighbor
- (i.e., an address that matches one of the router's own addresses
- on the arrival interface, under the subnet mask associated with
- that address of the router).
-
- - a mobility agent MAY be configured to send Agent Advertisements
- only in response to an Agent Solicitation message.
-
- If the home network is not a virtual network, then the home agent for
- any mobile node SHOULD be located on the link identified by the
- mobile node's home address, and Agent Advertisement messages sent by
- the home agent on this link MUST have the 'H' bit set. In this way,
- mobile nodes on their own home network will be able to determine that
- they are indeed at home. Any Agent Advertisement messages sent by
- the home agent on another link to which it may be attached (if it is
- a mobility agent serving more than one link), MUST NOT have the 'H'
- bit set, unless the home agent also serves as a home agent (to other
- mobile nodes) on that other link.
-
- If the home network is a virtual network, the home network has no
- physical realization external to the home agent itself. In this
- case, there is no physical network link on which to send Agent
- Advertisement messages advertising the home agent. Mobile nodes for
- which this is the home network are always treated as being away from
- home.
-
- On a particular subnet, either all mobility agents MUST include the
- Prefix-Lengths Extension or all of them MUST NOT include this
- Extension. Equivalently, it is prohibited for some agents on a given
- subnet to include the Extension but for others not to include it.
- Otherwise, one of the move detection algorithms designed for mobile
- nodes will not function properly (Section 2.4.2).
-
- 2.3.1. Advertised Router Addresses
-
- The ICMP Router Advertisement portion of the Agent Advertisement MAY
- contain one or more router addresses. Thus, an agent MAY include one
- of its own addresses in the advertisement. A foreign agent MAY
- discourage use of this address as a default router by setting the
- preference to a low value and by including the address of another
- router in the advertisement (with a correspondingly higher
- preference). Nevertheless, a foreign agent MUST route datagrams it
- receives from registered mobile nodes (Section 4.2.2).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 20]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 2.3.2. Sequence Numbers and Rollover Handling
-
- The sequence number in Agent Advertisements ranges from 0 to 0xffff.
- After booting, an agent MUST use the number 0 for its first
- advertisement. Each subsequent advertisement MUST use the sequence
- number one greater, with the exception that the sequence number
- 0xffff MUST be followed by sequence number 256. In this way, mobile
- nodes can distinguish reductions in sequence numbers that result from
- reboots, from reductions that result in rollover of the sequence
- number after it attains the value 0xffff.
-
- 2.4. Mobile Node Considerations
-
- Every mobile node MUST implement Agent Solicitation. Solicitations
- SHOULD only be sent in the absence of Agent Advertisements and when a
- care-of address has not been determined through a link-layer protocol
- or other means. The mobile node uses the same procedures, defaults,
- and constants for Agent Solicitation as specified for ICMP Router
- Solicitation messages [4], except that the mobile node MAY solicit
- more often than once every three seconds, and that a mobile node that
- is currently not connected to any foreign agent MAY solicit more
- times than MAX_SOLICITATIONS.
-
- The rate at which a mobile node sends Solicitations MUST be limited
- by the mobile node. The mobile node MAY send three initial
- Solicitations at a maximum rate of one per second while searching for
- an agent. After this, the rate at which Solicitations are sent MUST
- be reduced so as to limit the overhead on the local link. Subsequent
- Solicitations MUST be sent using a binary exponential backoff
- mechanism, doubling the interval between consecutive Solicitations,
- up to a maximum interval. The maximum interval SHOULD be chosen
- appropriately based upon the characteristics of the media over which
- the mobile node is soliciting. This maximum interval SHOULD be at
- least one minute between Solicitations.
-
- While still searching for an agent, the mobile node MUST NOT increase
- the rate at which it sends Solicitations unless it has received a
- positive indication that it has moved to a new link. After
- successfully registering with an agent, the mobile node SHOULD also
- increase the rate at which it will send Solicitations when it next
- begins searching for a new agent with which to register. The
- increased solicitation rate MAY revert to the maximum rate, but then
- MUST be limited in the manner described above. In all cases, the
- recommended solicitation intervals are nominal values. Mobile nodes
- MUST randomize their solicitation times around these nominal values
- as specified for ICMP Router Discovery [4].
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 21]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Mobile nodes MUST process received Agent Advertisements. A mobile
- node can distinguish an Agent Advertisement message from other uses
- of the ICMP Router Advertisement message by examining the number of
- advertised addresses and the IP Total Length field. When the IP
- total length indicates that the ICMP message is longer than needed
- for the number of advertised addresses, the remaining data is
- interpreted as one or more Extensions. The presence of a Mobility
- Agent Advertisement Extension identifies the advertisement as an
- Agent Advertisement.
-
- When multiple methods of agent discovery are in use, the mobile node
- SHOULD first attempt registration with agents including Mobility
- Agent Advertisement Extensions in their advertisements, in preference
- to those discovered by other means. This preference maximizes the
- likelihood that the registration will be recognized, thereby
- minimizing the number of registration attempts.
-
- 2.4.1. Registration Required
-
- When the mobile node receives an Agent Advertisement with the 'R' bit
- set, the mobile node SHOULD register through the foreign agent, even
- when the mobile node might be able to acquire its own co-located
- care-of address. This feature is intended to allow sites to enforce
- visiting policies (such as accounting) which require exchanges of
- authorization.
-
- 2.4.2. Move Detection
-
- Two primary mechanisms are provided for mobile nodes to detect when
- they have moved from one subnet to another. Other mechanisms MAY
- also be used. When the mobile node detects that it has moved, it
- SHOULD register (Section 3) with a suitable care-of address on the
- new foreign network. However, the mobile node MUST NOT register more
- frequently than once per second on average, as specified in Section
- 3.6.3.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 22]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 2.4.2.1. Algorithm 1
-
- The first method of move detection is based upon the Lifetime field
- within the main body of the ICMP Router Advertisement portion of the
- Agent Advertisement. A mobile node SHOULD record the Lifetime
- received in any Agent Advertisements, until that Lifetime expires.
- If the mobile node fails to receive another advertisement from the
- same agent within the specified Lifetime, it SHOULD assume that it
- has lost contact with that agent. If the mobile node has previously
- received an Agent Advertisement from another agent for which the
- Lifetime field has not yet expired, the mobile node MAY immediately
- attempt registration with that other agent. Otherwise, the mobile
- node SHOULD attempt to discover a new agent with which to register.
-
- 2.4.2.2. Algorithm 2
-
- The second method uses network prefixes. The Prefix-Lengths
- Extension MAY be used in some cases by a mobile node to determine
- whether or not a newly received Agent Advertisement was received on
- the same subnet as the mobile node's current care-of address. If the
- prefixes differ, the mobile node MAY assume that it has moved. If a
- mobile node is currently using a foreign agent care-of address, the
- mobile node SHOULD NOT use this method of move detection unless both
- the current agent and the new agent include the Prefix-Lengths
- Extension in their respective Agent Advertisements; if this Extension
- is missing from one or both of the advertisements, this method of
- move detection SHOULD NOT be used. Similarly, if a mobile node is
- using a co-located care-of address, it SHOULD not use this method of
- move detection unless the new agent includes the Prefix-Lengths
- Extension in its Advertisement and the mobile node knows the network
- prefix of its current co-located care-of address. On the expiration
- of its current registration, if this method indicates that the mobile
- node has moved, rather than re-registering with its current care-of
- address, a mobile node MAY choose instead to register with a the
- foreign agent sending the new Advertisement with the different
- network prefix. The Agent Advertisement on which the new
- registration is based MUST NOT have expired according to its Lifetime
- field.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 23]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 2.4.3. Returning Home
-
- A mobile node can detect that it has returned to its home network
- when it receives an Agent Advertisement from its own home agent. If
- so, it SHOULD deregister with its home agent (Section 3). Before
- attempting to deregister, the mobile node SHOULD configure its
- routing table appropriately for its home network (Section 4.2.1). In
- addition, if the home network is using ARP [16], the mobile node MUST
- follow the procedures described in Section 4.6 with regard to ARP,
- proxy ARP, and gratuitous ARP.
-
- 2.4.4. Sequence Numbers and Rollover Handling
-
- If a mobile node detects two successive values of the sequence number
- in the Agent Advertisements from the foreign agent with which it is
- registered, the second of which is less than the first and inside the
- range 0 to 255, the mobile node SHOULD register again. If the second
- value is less than the first but is greater than or equal to 256, the
- mobile node SHOULD assume that the sequence number has rolled over
- past its maximum value (0xffff), and that reregistration is not
- necessary (Section 2.3).
-
- 3. Registration
-
- Mobile IP registration provides a flexible mechanism for mobile nodes
- to communicate their current reachability information to their home
- agent. It is the method by which mobile nodes:
-
- - request forwarding services when visiting a foreign network,
-
- - inform their home agent of their current care-of address,
-
- - renew a registration which is due to expire, and/or
-
- - deregister when they return home.
-
- Registration messages exchange information between a mobile node,
- (optionally) a foreign agent, and the home agent. Registration
- creates or modifies a mobility binding at the home agent, associating
- the mobile node's home address with its care-of address for the
- specified Lifetime.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 24]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Several other (optional) capabilities are available through the
- registration procedure, which enable a mobile node to:
-
- - maintain multiple simultaneous registrations, so that a copy of
- each datagram will be tunneled to each active care-of address
-
- - deregister specific care-of addresses while retaining other
- mobility bindings, and
-
- - discover the address of a home agent if the mobile node is not
- configured with this information.
-
- 3.1. Registration Overview
-
- Mobile IP defines two different registration procedures, one via a
- foreign agent that relays the registration to the mobile node's home
- agent, and one directly with the mobile node's home agent. The
- following rules determine which of these two registration procedures
- to use in any particular circumstance:
-
- - If a mobile node is registering a foreign agent care-of address,
- the mobile node MUST register via that foreign agent.
-
- - If a mobile node is using a co-located care-of address, and
- receives an Agent Advertisement from a foreign agent on the
- link on which it is using this care-of address, the mobile node
- SHOULD register via that foreign agent (or via another foreign
- agent on this link) if the 'R' bit is set in the received Agent
- Advertisement message.
-
- - If a mobile node is otherwise using a co-located care-of address,
- the mobile node MUST register directly with its home agent.
-
- - If a mobile node has returned to its home network and is
- (de)registering with its home agent, the mobile node MUST
- register directly with its home agent.
-
- Both registration procedures involve the exchange of Registration
- Request and Registration Reply messages (Sections 3.3 and 3.4). When
- registering via a foreign agent, the registration procedure requires
- the following four messages:
-
- a) The mobile node sends a Registration Request to the
- prospective foreign agent to begin the registration process.
-
- b) The foreign agent processes the Registration Request and then
- relays it to the home agent.
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 25]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- c) The home agent sends a Registration Reply to the foreign
- agent to grant or deny the Request.
-
- d) The foreign agent processes the Registration Reply and then
- relays it to the mobile node to inform it of the disposition
- of its Request.
-
- When the mobile node instead registers directly with its home agent,
- the registration procedure requires only the following two messages:
-
- a) The mobile node sends a Registration Request to the home
- agent.
-
- b) The home agent sends a Registration Reply to the mobile
- node, granting or denying the Request.
-
- The registration messages defined in Sections 3.3 and 3.4 use the
- User Datagram Protocol (UDP) [17]. A nonzero UDP checksum SHOULD be
- included in the header, and MUST be checked by the recipient.
-
- 3.2. Authentication
-
- Each mobile node, foreign agent, and home agent MUST be able to
- support a mobility security association for mobile entities, indexed
- by their SPI and IP address. In the case of the mobile node, this
- must be its Home Address. See Section 5.1 for requirements for
- support of authentication algorithms. Registration messages between
- a mobile node and its home agent MUST be authenticated with the
- Mobile-Home Authentication Extension (Section 3.5.2). This Extension
- immediately follows all non-authentication Extensions, except those
- foreign agent-specific Extensions which may be added to the message
- after the mobile node computes the authentication.
-
- 3.3. Registration Request
-
- A mobile node registers with its home agent using a Registration
- Request message so that its home agent can create or modify a
- mobility binding for that mobile node (e.g., with a new lifetime).
- The Request may be relayed to the home agent by the foreign agent
- through which the mobile node is registering, or it may be sent
- directly to the home agent in the case in which the mobile node is
- registering a co-located care-of address.
-
- IP fields:
-
- Source Address Typically the interface address from which the
- message is sent.
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 26]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Destination Address Typically that of the foreign agent or the
- home agent.
-
- See Sections 3.6.1.1 and 3.7.2.2 for details.
-
- UDP fields:
-
- Source Port variable
-
- Destination Port 434
-
- The UDP header is followed by the Mobile IP fields shown below:
-
- 0 1 2 3
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type |S|B|D|M|G|V|rsv| Lifetime |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Home Address |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Home Agent |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Care-of Address |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | |
- + Identification +
- | |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Extensions ...
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
-
- Type 1 (Registration Request)
-
- S Simultaneous bindings. If the 'S' bit is set, the mobile
- node is requesting that the home agent retain its prior
- mobility bindings, as described in Section 3.6.1.2.
-
- B Broadcast datagrams. If the 'B' bit is set, the mobile
- node requests that the home agent tunnel to it any
- broadcast datagrams that it receives on the home network,
- as described in Section 4.3.
-
- D Decapsulation by mobile node. If the 'D' bit is set, the
- mobile node will itself decapsulate datagrams which are
- sent to the care-of address. That is, the mobile node is
- using a co-located care-of address.
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 27]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- M Minimal encapsulation. If the 'M' bit is set, the
- mobile node requests that its home agent use minimal
- encapsulation [15] for datagrams tunneled to the mobile
- node.
-
- G GRE encapsulation. If the 'G' bit is set, the
- mobile node requests that its home agent use GRE
- encapsulation [8] for datagrams tunneled to the mobile
- node.
-
- V The mobile node requests that its mobility agent use Van
- Jacobson header compression [10] over its link with the
- mobile node.
-
- rsv Reserved bits; sent as zero
-
- Lifetime
- The number of seconds remaining before the registration
- is considered expired. A value of zero indicates a
- request for deregistration. A value of 0xffff indicates
- infinity.
-
- Home Address
- The IP address of the mobile node.
-
- Home Agent
- The IP address of the mobile node's home agent.
-
- Care-of Address
- The IP address for the end of the tunnel.
-
- Identification
- A 64-bit number, constructed by the mobile node, used for
- matching Registration Requests with Registration Replies,
- and for protecting against replay attacks of registration
- messages. See Sections 5.4 and 5.6.
-
- Extensions
- The fixed portion of the Registration Request is followed
- by one or more of the Extensions listed in Section 3.5.
- The Mobile-Home Authentication Extension MUST be included
- in all Registration Requests. See Sections 3.6.1.3
- and 3.7.2.2 for information on the relative order in
- which different extensions, when present, MUST be placed
- in a Registration Request message.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 28]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 3.4. Registration Reply
-
- A mobility agent returns a Registration Reply message to a mobile
- node which has sent a Registration Request (Section 3.3) message. If
- the mobile node is requesting service from a foreign agent, that
- foreign agent will receive the Reply from the home agent and
- subsequently relay it to the mobile node. The Reply message contains
- the necessary codes to inform the mobile node about the status of its
- Request, along with the lifetime granted by the home agent, which MAY
- be smaller than the original Request.
-
- The foreign agent MUST NOT increase the Lifetime selected by the
- mobile node in the Registration Request, since the Lifetime is
- covered by the Mobile-Home Authentication Extension, which cannot be
- correctly (re)computed by the foreign agent. The home agent MUST NOT
- increase the Lifetime selected by the mobile node in the Registration
- Request, since doing so could increase it beyond the maximum
- Registration Lifetime allowed by the foreign agent. If the Lifetime
- received in the Registration Reply is greater than that in the
- Registration Request, the Lifetime in the Request MUST be used. When
- the Lifetime received in the Registration Reply is less than that in
- the Registration Request, the Lifetime in the Reply MUST be used.
-
- IP fields:
-
- Source Address Typically copied from the destination
- address of the Registration Request to which
- the agent is replying. See Sections 3.7.2.3
- and 3.8.3.1 for complete details.
-
- Destination Address Copied from the source address of the
- Registration Request to which the agent is
- replying
-
- UDP fields:
-
- Source Port <variable>
-
- Destination Port Copied from the source port of the
- corresponding Registration Request
- (Section 3.7.1).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 29]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- The UDP header is followed by the Mobile IP fields shown below:
-
- 0 1 2 3
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type | Code | Lifetime |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Home Address |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Home Agent |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | |
- + Identification +
- | |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Extensions ...
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
-
- Type 3 (Registration Reply)
-
- Code A value indicating the result of the Registration
- Request. See below for a list of currently defined Code
- values.
-
- Lifetime
- If the Code field indicates that the registration was
- accepted, the Lifetime field is set to the number of
- seconds remaining before the registration is considered
- expired. A value of zero indicates that the mobile node
- has been deregistered. A value of 0xffff indicates
- infinity. If the Code field indicates that the
- registration was denied, the contents of the Lifetime
- field are unspecified and MUST be ignored on reception.
-
- Home Address
- The IP address of the mobile node.
-
- Home Agent
- The IP address of the mobile node's home agent.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 30]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Identification
- A 64-bit number used for matching Registration Requests
- with Registration Replies, and for protecting against
- replay attacks of registration messages. The value is
- based on the Identification field from the Registration
- Request message from the mobile node, and on the style of
- replay protection used in the security context between
- the mobile node and its home agent (defined by the
- mobility security association between them, and SPI
- value in the Mobile-Home Authentication Extension). See
- Sections 5.4 and 5.6.
-
- Extensions
- The fixed portion of the Registration Reply is followed
- by one or more of the Extensions listed in Section 3.5.
- The Mobile-Home Authentication Extension MUST be included
- in all Registration Replies returned by the home agent.
- See Sections 3.7.2.2 and 3.8.3.3 for rules on placement
- of extensions to Reply messages.
-
- The following values are defined for use within the Code field.
- Registration successful:
-
- 0 registration accepted
- 1 registration accepted, but simultaneous mobility
- bindings unsupported
-
- Registration denied by the foreign agent:
-
- 64 reason unspecified
- 65 administratively prohibited
- 66 insufficient resources
- 67 mobile node failed authentication
- 68 home agent failed authentication
- 69 requested Lifetime too long
- 70 poorly formed Request
- 71 poorly formed Reply
- 72 requested encapsulation unavailable
- 73 requested Van Jacobson compression unavailable
- 80 home network unreachable (ICMP error received)
- 81 home agent host unreachable (ICMP error received)
- 82 home agent port unreachable (ICMP error received)
- 88 home agent unreachable (other ICMP error received)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 31]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Registration denied by the home agent:
-
- 128 reason unspecified
- 129 administratively prohibited
- 130 insufficient resources
- 131 mobile node failed authentication
- 132 foreign agent failed authentication
- 133 registration Identification mismatch
- 134 poorly formed Request
- 135 too many simultaneous mobility bindings
- 136 unknown home agent address
-
- Up-to-date values of the Code field are specified in the most recent
- "Assigned Numbers" [20].
-
- 3.5. Registration Extensions
-
- 3.5.1. Computing Authentication Extension Values
-
- The Authenticator value computed for each authentication Extension
- MUST protect the following fields from the registration message:
-
- - the UDP payload (that is, the Registration Request or
- Registration Reply data),
-
- - all prior Extensions in their entirety, and
-
- - the Type and Length of this Extension.
-
- The default authentication algorithm uses keyed-MD5 [21] in
- "prefix+suffix" mode to compute a 128-bit "message digest" of the
- registration message. The default authenticator is a 128-bit value
- computed as the MD5 checksum over the the following stream of bytes:
-
- - the shared secret defined by the mobility security association
- between the nodes and by SPI value specified in the
- authentication Extension, followed by
-
- - the protected fields from the registration message, in the order
- specified above, followed by
-
- - the shared secret again.
-
- Note that the Authenticator field itself and the UDP header are NOT
- included in the computation of the default Authenticator value. See
- Section 5.1 for information about support requirements for message
- authentication codes, which are to be used with the various
- authentication Extensions.
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 32]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- The Security Parameter Index (SPI) within any of the authentication
- Extensions defines the security context which is used to compute the
- Authenticator value and which MUST be used by the receiver to check
- that value. In particular, the SPI selects the authentication
- algorithm and mode (Section 5.1) and secret (a shared key, or
- appropriate public/private key pair) used in computing the
- Authenticator. In order to ensure interoperability between different
- implementations of the Mobile IP protocol, an implementation MUST be
- able to associate any SPI value with any authentication algorithm and
- mode which it implements. In addition, all implementations of Mobile
- IP MUST implement the default authentication algorithm (keyed-MD5)
- and mode ("prefix+suffix") defined above.
-
- 3.5.2. Mobile-Home Authentication Extension
-
- Exactly one Mobile-Home Authentication Extension MUST be present in
- all Registration Requests and Registration Replies, and is intended
- to eliminate problems [2] which result from the uncontrolled
- propagation of remote redirects in the Internet. The location of the
- extension marks the end of the authenticated data.
-
- 0 1 2 3
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type | Length | SPI ....
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- ... SPI (cont.) | Authenticator ...
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-
- Type 32
-
- Length 4 plus the number of bytes in the Authenticator.
-
- SPI Security Parameter Index (4 bytes). An opaque
- identifier (see Section 1.6).
-
- Authenticator (variable length) (See Section 3.5.1.)
-
- 3.5.3. Mobile-Foreign Authentication Extension
-
- This Extension MAY be included in Registration Requests and Replies
- in cases in which a mobility security association exists between the
- mobile node and the foreign agent. See Section 5.1 for information
- about support requirements for message authentication codes.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 33]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 0 1 2 3
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type | Length | SPI ....
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- ... SPI (cont.) | Authenticator ...
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-
- Type 33
-
- Length 4 plus the number of bytes in the Authenticator.
-
- SPI Security Parameter Index (4 bytes). An opaque
- identifier (see Section 1.6).
-
- Authenticator (variable length) (See Section 3.5.1.)
-
- 3.5.4. Foreign-Home Authentication Extension
-
- This Extension MAY be included in Registration Requests and Replies
- in cases in which a mobility security association exists between the
- foreign agent and the home agent. See Section 5.1 for information
- about support requirements for message authentication codes.
-
- 0 1 2 3
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type | Length | SPI ....
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- ... SPI (cont.) | Authenticator ...
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-
- Type 34
-
- Length 4 plus the number of bytes in the Authenticator.
-
- SPI Security Parameter Index (4 bytes). An opaque
- identifier (see Section 1.6).
-
- Authenticator (variable length) (See Section 3.5.1.)
-
- 3.6. Mobile Node Considerations
-
- A mobile node MUST be configured with its home address, a netmask,
- and a mobility security association for each home agent. In
- addition, a mobile node MAY be configured with the IP address of one
- or more of its home agents; otherwise, the mobile node MAY discover a
- home agent using the procedures described in Section 3.6.1.2.
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 34]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- For each pending registration, the mobile node maintains the
- following information:
-
- - the link-layer address of the foreign agent to which the
- Registration Request was sent, if applicable,
- - the IP destination address of the Registration Request,
- - the care-of address used in the registration,
- - the Identification value sent in the registration,
- - the originally requested Lifetime, and
- - the remaining Lifetime of the pending registration.
-
- A mobile node SHOULD initiate a registration whenever it detects a
- change in its network connectivity. See Section 2.4.2 for methods by
- which mobile nodes MAY make such a determination. When it is away
- from home, the mobile node's Registration Request allows its home
- agent to create or modify a mobility binding for it. When it is at
- home, the mobile node's (de)Registration Request allows its home
- agent to delete any previous mobility binding(s) for it. A mobile
- node operates without the support of mobility functions when it is at
- home.
-
- There are other conditions under which the mobile node SHOULD
- (re)register with its foreign agent, such as when the mobile node
- detects that the foreign agent has rebooted (as specified in Section
- 2.4.4) and when the current registration's Lifetime is near
- expiration.
-
- In the absence of link-layer indications of changes in point of
- attachment, Agent Advertisements from new agents SHOULD NOT cause a
- mobile node to attempt a new registration, if its current
- registration has not expired and it is still also receiving Agent
- Advertisements from the foreign agent with which it is currently
- registered. In the absence of link-layer indications, a mobile node
- MUST NOT attempt to register more often than once per second.
-
- A mobile node MAY register with a different agent when transport-
- layer protocols indicate excessive retransmissions. A mobile node
- MUST NOT consider reception of an ICMP Redirect from a foreign agent
- that is currently providing service to it as reason to register with
- a new foreign agent. Within these constraints, the mobile node MAY
- register again at any time.
-
- Appendix D shows some examples of how the fields in registration
- messages would be set up in some typical registration scenarios.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 35]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 3.6.1. Sending Registration Requests
-
- The following sections specify details for the values the mobile node
- MUST supply in the fields of Registration Request messages.
-
- 3.6.1.1. IP Fields
-
- This section provides the specific rules by which mobile nodes pick
- values for the IP header fields of a Registration Request.
-
- IP Source Address:
-
- - When registering on a foreign network with a co-located care-of
- address, the IP source address MUST be the care-of address.
-
- - In all other circumstances, the IP source address MUST be the
- mobile node's home address.
-
- IP Destination Address:
-
- - When the mobile node has discovered the agent with which it is
- registering, through some means (e.g., link-layer) that does not
- provide the IP address of the agent (the IP address of the agent
- is unknown to the mobile node), then the "All Mobility Agents"
- multicast address (224.0.0.11) MUST be used. In this case, the
- mobile node MUST use the agent's link-layer unicast address in
- order to deliver the datagram to the correct agent.
-
- - When registering with a foreign agent, the address of the agent
- as learned from the IP source address of the corresponding Agent
- Advertisement MUST be used. In addition, when transmitting
- this Registration Request message, the mobile node MUST use a
- link-layer destination address copied from the link-layer source
- address of the Agent Advertisement message in which it learned
- this foreign agent's IP address.
-
- - When the mobile node is registering directly with its home
- agent and knows the (unicast) IP address of its home agent, the
- destination address MUST be set to this address.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 36]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- - If the mobile node is registering directly with its home
- agent, but does not know the IP address of its home agent,
- the mobile node may use dynamic home agent address resolution
- to automatically determine the IP address of its home agent
- (Section 3.6.1.2). In this case, the IP destination address is
- set to the subnet-directed broadcast address of the mobile node's
- home network. This address MUST NOT be used as the destination
- IP address if the mobile node is registering via a foreign agent,
- although it MAY be used as the Home Agent address in the body of
- the Registration Request when registering via a foreign agent.
-
- IP Time to Live:
-
- - The IP TTL field MUST be set to 1 if the IP destination address
- is set to the "All Mobility Agents" multicast address as
- described above. Otherwise a suitable value should be chosen in
- accordance with standard IP practice [19].
-
- 3.6.1.2. Registration Request Fields
-
- This section provides specific rules by which mobile nodes pick
- values for the fields within the fixed portion of a Registration
- Request.
-
- A mobile node MAY set the 'S' bit in order to request that the home
- agent maintain prior mobility binding(s). Otherwise, the home agent
- deletes any previous binding(s) and replaces them with the new
- binding specified in the Registration Request. Multiple simultaneous
- mobility bindings are likely to be useful when a mobile node using at
- least one wireless network interface moves within wireless
- transmission range of more than one foreign agent. IP explicitly
- allows duplication of datagrams. When the home agent allows
- simultaneous bindings, it will tunnel a separate copy of each
- arriving datagram to each care-of address, and the mobile node will
- receive multiple copies of datagrams destined to it.
-
- The mobile node SHOULD set the 'D' bit if it is registering with a
- co-located care-of address. Otherwise, the 'D' bit MUST NOT be set.
-
- A mobile node MAY set the 'B' bit to request its home agent to
- forward to it, a copy of broadcast datagrams received by its home
- agent from the home network. The method used by the home agent to
- forward broadcast datagrams depends on the type of care-of address
- registered by the mobile node, as determined by the 'D' bit in the
- mobile node's Registration Request:
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 37]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- - If the 'D' bit is set, then the mobile node has indicated that it
- will decapsulate any datagrams tunneled to this care-of address
- itself (the mobile node is using a co-located care-of address).
- In this case, to forward such a received broadcast datagram to
- the mobile node, the home agent MUST tunnel it to this care-of
- address. The mobile node de-tunnels the received datagram in the
- same way as any other datagram tunneled directly to it.
-
- - If the 'D' bit is NOT set, then the mobile node has indicated
- that it is using a foreign agent care-of address, and that the
- foreign agent will thus decapsulate arriving datagrams before
- forwarding them to the mobile node. In this case, to forward
- such a received broadcast datagram to the mobile node, the home
- agent MUST first encapsulate the broadcast datagram in a unicast
- datagram addressed to the mobile node's home address, and then
- MUST tunnel this resulting datagram to the mobile node's care-of
- address.
-
- When decapsulated by the foreign agent, the inner datagram will
- thus be a unicast IP datagram addressed to the mobile node,
- identifying to the foreign agent the intended destination of the
- encapsulated broadcast datagram, and will be delivered to the
- mobile node in the same way as any tunneled datagram arriving for
- the mobile node. The foreign agent MUST NOT decapsulate the
- encapsulated broadcast datagram and MUST NOT use a local network
- broadcast to transmit it to the mobile node. The mobile node thus
- MUST decapsulate the encapsulated broadcast datagram itself, and
- thus MUST NOT set the 'B' bit in its Registration Request in this
- case unless it is capable of decapsulating datagrams.
-
- The mobile node MAY request alternative forms of encapsulation by
- setting the 'M' bit and/or the 'G' bit, but only if the mobile node
- is decapsulating its own datagrams (the mobile node is using a co-
- located care-of address) or if its foreign agent has indicated
- support for these forms of encapsulation by setting the corresponding
- bits in the Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension of an Agent
- Advertisement received by the mobile node. Otherwise, the mobile
- node MUST NOT set these bits.
-
- The Lifetime field is chosen as follows:
-
- - If the mobile node is registering with a foreign agent, the
- Lifetime SHOULD NOT exceed the value in the Registration Lifetime
- field of the Agent Advertisement message received from the
- foreign agent. When the method by which the care-of address is
- learned does not include a Lifetime, the default ICMP Router
- Advertisement Lifetime (1800 seconds) MAY be used.
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 38]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- - The mobile node MAY ask a home agent to delete a particular
- mobility binding, by sending a Registration Request with the
- care-of address for this binding, with the Lifetime field set to
- zero (Section 3.8.2).
-
- - Similarly, a Lifetime of zero is used when the mobile node
- deregisters all care-of addresses, such as upon returning home.
-
- The Home Agent field MUST be set to the address of the mobile node's
- home agent, if the mobile node knows this address. Otherwise, the
- mobile node MAY use dynamic home agent address resolution to learn
- the address of its home agent. In this case, the mobile node MUST
- set the Home Agent field to the subnet-directed broadcast address of
- the mobile node's home network. Each home agent receiving such a
- Registration Request with a broadcast destination address MUST reject
- the mobile node's registration and SHOULD return a rejection
- Registration Reply indicating its unicast IP address for use by the
- mobile node in a future registration attempt.
-
- The Care-of Address field MUST be set to the value of the particular
- care-of address that the mobile node wishes to (de)register. In the
- special case in which a mobile node wishes to deregister all care-of
- addresses, it MUST set this field to its home address.
-
- The mobile node chooses the Identification field in accordance with
- the style of replay protection it uses with its home agent. This is
- part of the mobility security association the mobile node shares with
- its home agent. See Section 5.6 for the method by which the mobile
- node computes the Identification field.
-
- 3.6.1.3. Extensions
-
- This section describes the ordering of any mandatory and any optional
- Extensions that a mobile node appends to a Registration Request.
- This following ordering MUST be followed:
-
- a) The IP header, followed by the UDP header, followed by the
- fixed-length portion of the Registration Request, followed by
-
- b) If present, any non-authentication Extensions expected to be
- used by the home agent (which may or may not also be used by
- the foreign agent), followed by
-
- c) The Mobile-Home Authentication Extension, followed by
-
- d) If present, any non-authentication Extensions used only by
- the foreign agent, followed by
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 39]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- e) The Mobile-Foreign Authentication Extension, if present.
-
- Note that items (a) and (c) MUST appear in every Registration Request
- sent by the mobile node. Items (b), (d), and (e) are optional.
- However, item (e) MUST be included when the mobile node and the
- foreign agent share a mobility security association.
-
- 3.6.2. Receiving Registration Replies
-
- Registration Replies will be received by the mobile node in response
- to its Registration Requests. Registration Replies generally fall
- into three categories:
-
- - the registration was accepted,
- - the registration was denied by the foreign agent, or
- - the registration was denied by the home agent.
-
- The remainder of this section describes the Registration Reply
- handling by a mobile node in each of these three categories.
-
- 3.6.2.1. Validity Checks
-
- Registration Replies with an invalid, non-zero UDP checksum MUST be
- silently discarded.
-
- In addition, the low-order 32 bits of the Identification field in the
- Registration Reply MUST be compared to the low-order 32 bits of the
- Identification field in the most recent Registration Request sent to
- the replying agent. If they do not match, the Reply MUST be silently
- discarded.
-
- Also, the authentication in the Registration Reply MUST be checked.
- That is, the mobile node MUST check for the presence of a valid
- authentication Extension, acting in accordance with the Code field in
- the Reply. The rules are as follows:
-
- a) If the mobile node and the foreign agent share a
- mobility security association, exactly one Mobile-Foreign
- Authentication Extension MUST be present in the Registration
- Reply, and the mobile node MUST check the Authenticator
- value in the Extension. If no Mobile-Foreign Authentication
- Extension is found, or if more than one Mobile-Foreign
- Authentication Extension is found, or if the Authenticator is
- invalid, the mobile node MUST silently discard the Reply and
- SHOULD log the event as a security exception.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 40]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- b) If the Code field indicates that service is denied by
- the home agent, or if the Code field indicates that the
- registration was accepted by the home agent, exactly one
- Mobile-Home Authentication Extension MUST be present in
- the Registration Reply, and the mobile node MUST check the
- Authenticator value in the Extension. If no Mobile-Home
- Authentication Extension is found, or if more than one
- Mobile-Home Authentication Extension is found, or if the
- Authenticator is invalid, the mobile node MUST silently
- discard the Reply and SHOULD log the event as a security
- exception.
-
- If the Code field indicates an authentication failure, either at the
- foreign agent or the home agent, then it is quite possible that any
- authenticators in the Registration Reply will also be in error. This
- could happen, for example, if the shared secret between the mobile
- node and home agent was erroneously configured. The mobile node
- SHOULD log such errors as security exceptions.
-
- 3.6.2.2. Registration Request Accepted
-
- If the Code field indicates that the request has been accepted, the
- mobile node SHOULD configure its routing table appropriately for its
- current point of attachment (Section 4.2.1).
-
- If the mobile node is returning to its home network and that network
- is one which implements ARP, the mobile node MUST follow the
- procedures described in Section 4.6 with regard to ARP, proxy ARP,
- and gratuitous ARP.
-
- If the mobile node has registered on a foreign network, it SHOULD
- re-register before the expiration of the Lifetime of its
- registration. As described in Section 3.6, for each pending
- Registration Request, the mobile node MUST maintain the remaining
- lifetime of this pending registration, as well as the original
- Lifetime from the Registration Request. When the mobile node
- receives a valid Registration Reply, the mobile node MUST decrease
- its view of the remaining lifetime of the registration by the amount
- by which the home agent decreased the originally requested Lifetime.
- This procedure is equivalent to the mobile node starting a timer for
- the granted Lifetime at the time it sent the Registration Request,
- even though the granted Lifetime is not known to the mobile node
- until the Registration Reply is received. Since the Registration
- Request is certainly sent before the home agent begins timing the
- registration Lifetime (also based on the granted Lifetime), this
- procedure ensures that the mobile node will re-register before the
- home agent expires and deletes the registration, in spite of possibly
- non-negligible transmission delays for the original Registration
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 41]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Request and Reply that started the timing of the Lifetime at the
- mobile node and its home agent.
-
- 3.6.2.3. Registration Request Denied
-
- If the Code field indicates that service is being denied, the mobile
- node SHOULD log the error. In certain cases the mobile node may be
- able to "repair" the error. These include:
-
- Code 69: (Denied by foreign agent, Lifetime too long)
-
- In this case, the Lifetime field in the Registration Reply will
- contain the maximum Lifetime value which that foreign agent is
- willing to accept in any Registration Request. The mobile node
- MAY attempt to register with this same agent, using a Lifetime
- in the Registration Request that MUST be less than or equal to
- the value specified in the Reply.
-
- Code 133: (Denied by home agent, Identification mismatch)
-
- In this case, the Identification field in the Registration
- Reply will contain a value that allows the mobile node to
- synchronize with the home agent, based upon the style of replay
- protection in effect (Section 5.6). The mobile node MUST
- adjust the parameters it uses to compute the Identification
- field based upon the information in the Registration Reply,
- before issuing any future Registration Requests.
-
- Code 136: (Denied by home agent, Unknown home agent address)
-
- This code is returned by a home agent when the mobile node is
- performing dynamic home agent address resolution as described
- in Sections 3.6.1.1 and 3.6.1.2. In this case, the Home Agent
- field within the Reply will contain the unicast IP address of
- the home agent returning the Reply. The mobile node MAY then
- attempt to register with this home agent in future Registration
- Requests. In addition, the mobile node SHOULD adjust the
- parameters it uses to compute the Identification field based
- upon the corresponding field in the Registration Reply, before
- issuing any future Registration Requests.
-
- 3.6.3. Registration Retransmission
-
- When no Registration Reply has been received within a reasonable
- time, another Registration Request MAY be transmitted. When
- timestamps are used, a new registration Identification is chosen for
- each retransmission; thus it counts as a new registration. When
- nonces are used, the unanswered Request is retransmitted unchanged;
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 42]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- thus the retransmission does not count as a new registration (Section
- 5.6). In this way a retransmission will not require the home agent
- to resynchronize with the mobile node by issuing another nonce in the
- case in which the original Registration Request (rather than its
- Registration Reply) was lost by the network.
-
- The maximum time until a new Registration Request is sent SHOULD be
- no greater than the requested Lifetime of the Registration Request.
- The minimum value SHOULD be large enough to account for the size of
- the messages, twice the round trip time for transmission to the home
- agent, and at least an additional 100 milliseconds to allow for
- processing the messages before responding. The round trip time for
- transmission to the home agent will be at least as large as the time
- required to transmit the messages at the link speed of the mobile
- node's current point of attachment. Some circuits add another 200
- milliseconds of satellite delay in the total round trip time to the
- home agent. The minimum time between Registration Requests MUST NOT
- be less than 1 second. Each successive retransmission timeout period
- SHOULD be at least twice the previous period, as long as that is less
- than the maximum as specified above.
-
- 3.7. Foreign Agent Considerations
-
- The foreign agent plays a mostly passive role in Mobile IP
- registration. It relays Registration Requests between mobile nodes
- and home agents, and, when it provides the care-of address,
- decapsulates datagrams for delivery to the mobile node. It SHOULD
- also send periodic Agent Advertisement messages to advertise its
- presence as described in Section 2.3, if not detectable by link-layer
- means.
-
- A foreign agent MUST NOT transmit a Registration Request except when
- relaying a Registration Request received from a mobile node, to the
- mobile node's home agent. A foreign agent MUST NOT transmit a
- Registration Reply except when relaying a Registration Reply received
- from a mobile node's home agent, or when replying to a Registration
- Request received from a mobile node in the case in which the foreign
- agent is denying service to the mobile node. In particular, a
- foreign agent MUST NOT generate a Registration Request or Reply
- because a mobile node's registration Lifetime has expired. A foreign
- agent also MUST NOT originate a Registration Request message that
- asks for deregistration of a mobile node; however, it MUST relay
- valid (de)Registration Requests originated by a mobile node.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 43]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 3.7.1. Configuration and Registration Tables
-
- Each foreign agent MUST be configured with a care-of address. In
- addition, for each pending or current registration, the foreign agent
- MUST maintain a visitor list entry containing the following
- information obtained from the mobile node's Registration Request:
-
- - the link-layer source address of the mobile node
- - the IP Source Address (the mobile node's Home Address)
- - the IP Destination Address (as specified in 3.6.2.3)
- - the UDP Source Port
- - the Home Agent address
- - the Identification field
- - the requested registration Lifetime, and
- - the remaining Lifetime of the pending or current registration.
-
- As with any node on the Internet, a foreign agent MAY also share
- mobility security associations with any other nodes. When relaying a
- Registration Request from a mobile node to its home agent, if the
- foreign agent shares a mobility security association with the home
- agent, it MUST add a Foreign-Home Authentication Extension to the
- Request and MUST check the required Foreign-Home Authentication
- Extension in the Registration Reply from the home agent (Sections 3.3
- and 3.4). Similarly, when receiving a Registration Request from a
- mobile node, if the foreign agent shares a mobility security
- association with the mobile node, it MUST check the required Mobile-
- Foreign Authentication Extension in the Request and MUST add a
- Mobile-Foreign Authentication Extension to the Registration Reply to
- the mobile node.
-
- 3.7.2. Receiving Registration Requests
-
- If the foreign agent accepts a Registration Request from a mobile
- node, it then MUST relay the Request to the indicated home agent.
- Otherwise, if the foreign agent denies the Request, it MUST send a
- Registration Reply to the mobile node with an appropriate denial
- Code, except in cases where the foreign agent would be required to
- send out more than one such denial per second to the same mobile
- node. The following sections describe this behavior in more detail.
-
- If a foreign agent receives a Registration Request from a mobile node
- in its visitor list, the existing visitor list entry for the mobile
- node SHOULD NOT be deleted or modified until the foreign agent
- receives a valid Registration Reply from the home agent with a Code
- indicating success. The foreign agent MUST record the new pending
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 44]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Request separately from the existing visitor list entry for the
- mobile node. If the Registration Request requests deregistration,
- the existing visitor list entry for the mobile node SHOULD NOT be
- deleted until the foreign agent has received a successful
- Registration Reply. If the Registration Reply indicates that the
- Request (for registration or deregistration) was denied by the home
- agent, the existing visitor list entry for the mobile node MUST NOT
- be modified as a result of receiving the Registration Reply.
-
- 3.7.2.1. Validity Checks
-
- Registration Requests with an invalid, non-zero UDP checksum MUST be
- silently discarded.
-
- Also, the authentication in the Registration Request MUST be checked.
- If the foreign agent and the mobile node share a mobility security
- association, exactly one Mobile-Foreign Authentication Extension MUST
- be present in the Registration Request, and the foreign agent MUST
- check the Authenticator value in the Extension. If no Mobile-Foreign
- Authentication Extension is found, or if more than one Mobile-Foreign
- Authentication Extension is found, or if the Authenticator is
- invalid, the foreign agent MUST silently discard the Request and
- SHOULD log the event as a security exception. The foreign agent also
- SHOULD send a Registration Reply to the mobile node with Code 67.
-
- 3.7.2.2. Forwarding a Valid Request to the Home Agent
-
- If the foreign agent accepts the mobile node's Registration Request,
- it MUST relay the Request to the mobile node's home agent as
- specified in the Home Agent field of the Registration Request. The
- foreign agent MUST NOT modify any of the fields beginning with the
- fixed portion of the Registration Request up through and including
- the Mobile-Home Authentication Extension. Otherwise, an
- authentication failure is very likely to occur at the home agent. In
- addition, the foreign agent proceeds as follows:
-
- - It MUST process and remove any Extensions following the
- Mobile-Home Authentication Extension,
- - It MAY append any of its own non-authentication Extensions of
- relevance to the home agent, if applicable, and
- - It MUST append the Foreign-Home Authentication Extension, if the
- foreign agent shares a mobility security association with the home
- agent.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 45]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Specific fields within the IP header and the UDP header of the
- relayed Registration Request MUST be set as follows:
-
- IP Source Address
- The foreign agent's address on the interface from which
- the message will be sent.
-
- IP Destination Address
- Copied from the Home Agent field within the Registration
- Request.
-
- UDP Source Port
- <variable>
-
- UDP Destination Port
- 434
-
- After forwarding a valid Registration Request to the home agent, the
- foreign agent MUST begin timing the remaining lifetime of the pending
- registration based on the Lifetime in the Registration Request. If
- this lifetime expires before receiving a valid Registration Reply,
- the foreign agent MUST delete its visitor list entry for this pending
- registration.
-
- 3.7.2.3. Denying Invalid Requests
-
- If the foreign agent denies the mobile node's Registration Request
- for any reason, it SHOULD send the mobile node a Registration Reply
- with a suitable denial Code. In such a case, the Home Address, Home
- Agent, and Identification fields within the Registration Reply are
- copied from the corresponding fields of the Registration Request.
-
- If the Reserved field is nonzero, the foreign agent MUST deny the
- Request and SHOULD return a Registration Reply with status code 70 to
- the mobile node. If the Request is being denied because the
- requested Lifetime is too long, the foreign agent sets the Lifetime
- in the Reply to the maximum Lifetime value it is willing to accept in
- any Registration Request, and sets the Code field to 69. Otherwise,
- the Lifetime SHOULD be copied from the Lifetime field in the Request.
-
- Specific fields within the IP header and the UDP header of the
- Registration Reply MUST be set as follows:
-
- IP Source Address
- Copied from the IP Destination Address of Registration
- Request, unless the "All Agents Multicast" address was
- used. In this case, the foreign agent's address (on the
- interface from which the message will be sent) MUST be
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 46]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- used.
-
- IP Destination Address
- Copied from the IP Source Address of the Registration
- Request.
-
- UDP Source Port
- 434
-
- UDP Destination Port
- Copied from the UDP Source Port of the Registration
- Request.
-
- 3.7.3. Receiving Registration Replies
-
- The foreign agent updates its visitor list when it receives a valid
- Registration Reply from a home agent. It then relays the
- Registration Reply to the mobile node. The following sections
- describe this behavior in more detail.
-
- If upon relaying a Registration Request to a home agent, the foreign
- agent receives an ICMP error message instead of a Registration Reply,
- then the foreign agent SHOULD send to the mobile node a Registration
- Reply with an appropriate "Home Agent Unreachable" failure Code
- (within the range 80-95, inclusive). See Section 3.7.2.3 for details
- on building the Registration Reply.
-
- 3.7.3.1. Validity Checks
-
- Registration Replies with an invalid, non-zero UDP checksum MUST be
- silently discarded.
-
- When a foreign agent receives a Registration Reply message, it MUST
- search its visitor list for a pending Registration Request with the
- same mobile node home address as indicated in the Reply. If no
- pending Request is found, the foreign agent MUST silently discard the
- Reply. The foreign agent MUST also silently discard the Reply if the
- low-order 32 bits of the Identification field in the Reply do not
- match those in the Request.
-
- Also, the authentication in the Registration Reply MUST be checked.
- If the foreign agent and the home agent share a mobility security
- association, exactly one Foreign-Home Authentication Extension MUST
- be present in the Registration Reply, and the foreign agent MUST
- check the Authenticator value in the Extension. If no Foreign-Home
- Authentication Extension is found, or if more than one Foreign-Home
- Authentication Extension is found, or if the Authenticator is
- invalid, the foreign agent MUST silently discard the Reply and SHOULD
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 47]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- log the event as a security exception. The foreign agent also MUST
- reject the mobile node's registration and SHOULD send a Registration
- Reply to the mobile node with Code 68.
-
- 3.7.3.2. Forwarding Replies to the Mobile Node
-
- A Registration Reply which satisfies the validity checks of Section
- 3.8.2.1 is relayed to the mobile node. The foreign agent MUST also
- update its visitor list entry for the mobile node to reflect the
- results of the Registration Request, as indicated by the Code field
- in the Reply. If the Code indicates that the mobile node has
- accepted the registration and the Lifetime field is nonzero, the
- foreign agent MUST set the Lifetime in the visitor list entry to the
- value specified in the Lifetime field of the Registration Reply. If,
- instead, the Code indicates that the Lifetime field is zero, the
- foreign agent MUST delete its visitor list entry for the mobile node.
- Finally, if the Code indicates that the registration was denied by
- the home agent, the foreign agent MUST delete its pending
- registration list entry, but not its visitor list entry, for the
- mobile node.
-
- The foreign agent MUST NOT modify any of the fields beginning with
- the fixed portion of the Registration Reply up through and including
- the Mobile-Home Authentication Extension. Otherwise, an
- authentication failure is very likely to occur at the mobile node.
- In addition, the foreign agent SHOULD perform the following
- additional procedures:
-
- - It MUST process and remove any Extensions following the
- Mobile-Home Authentication Extension,
- - It MAY append its own non-authentication Extensions of relevance
- to the mobile node, if applicable, and
- - It MUST append the Mobile-Foreign Authentication Extension, if
- the foreign agent shares a mobility security association with the
- mobile node.
-
- Specific fields within the IP header and the UDP header of the
- relayed Registration Reply are set according to the same rules
- specified in Section 3.7.2.3.
-
- After forwarding a valid Registration Reply to the mobile node, the
- foreign agent MUST update its visitor list entry for this
- registration as follows. If the Registration Reply indicates that
- the registration was accepted by the home agent, the foreign agent
- resets its timer of the lifetime of the registration to the Lifetime
- granted in the Registration Reply; unlike the mobile node's timing of
- the registration lifetime as described in Section 3.6.2.2, the
- foreign agent considers this lifetime to begin when it forwards the
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 48]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Registration Reply message, ensuring that the foreign agent will not
- expire the registration before the mobile node does. On the other
- hand, if the Registration Reply indicates that the registration was
- rejected by the home agent, the foreign agent deletes its visitor
- list entry for this attempted registration.
-
- 3.8. Home Agent Considerations
-
- Home agents play a reactive role in the registration process. The
- home agent receives Registration Requests from the mobile node
- (perhaps relayed by a foreign agent), updates its record of the
- mobility bindings for this mobile node, and issues a suitable
- Registration Reply in response to each.
-
- A home agent MUST NOT transmit a Registration Reply except when
- replying to a Registration Request received from a mobile node. In
- particular, the home agent MUST NOT generate a Registration Reply to
- indicate that the Lifetime has expired.
-
- 3.8.1. Configuration and Registration Tables
-
- Each home agent MUST be configured with an IP address and with the
- prefix size for the home network. The home agent MUST be configured
- with the home address and mobility security association of each
- authorized mobile node that it is serving as a home agent. When the
- home agent accepts a valid Registration Request from a mobile node
- that it serves as a home agent, the home agent MUST create or modify
- the entry for this mobile node in its mobility binding list
- containing:
-
- - the mobile node's care-of address
- - the Identification field from the Registration Reply
- - the remaining Lifetime of the registration
-
- The home agent MAY also maintain mobility security associations with
- various foreign agents. When receiving a Registration Request from a
- foreign agent, if the home agent shares a mobility security
- association with the foreign agent, the home agent MUST check the
- Authenticator in the required Foreign-Home Authentication Extension
- in the message, based on this mobility security association.
- Similarly, when sending a Registration Reply to a foreign agent, if
- the home agent shares a mobility security association with the
- foreign agent, the home agent MUST include a Foreign-Home
- Authentication Extension in the message, based on this mobility
- security association.
-
- 3.8.2. Receiving Registration Requests
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 49]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- If the home agent accepts an incoming Registration Request, it MUST
- update its record of the the mobile node's mobility binding(s) and
- SHOULD send a Registration Reply with a suitable Code. Otherwise
- (the home agent denies the Request), it SHOULD send a Registration
- Reply with an appropriate Code specifying the reason the Request was
- denied. The following sections describe this behavior in more
- detail.
-
- 3.8.2.1. Validity Checks
-
- Registration Requests with an invalid, non-zero UDP checksum MUST be
- silently discarded by the home agent.
-
- The authentication in the Registration Request MUST be checked. This
- involves the following operations:
-
- a) The home agent MUST check for the presence of a valid
- Mobile-Home Authentication Extension, and perform the
- indicated authentication. Exactly one Mobile-Home
- Authentication Extension MUST be present in the Registration
- Request, and the home agent MUST check the Authenticator
- value in the Extension. If no Mobile-Home Authentication
- Extension is found, or if more than one Mobile-Home
- Authentication Extension is found, or if the Authenticator
- is invalid, the home agent MUST reject the mobile node's
- registration and SHOULD send a Registration Reply to the
- mobile node with Code 131. The home agent MUST then discard
- the Request and SHOULD log the error as a security exception.
-
- b) The home agent MUST check that the registration
- Identification field is correct using the context selected by
- the SPI within the Mobile-Home Authentication Extension. See
- Section 5.6 for a description of how this is performed. If
- incorrect, the home agent MUST reject the Request and SHOULD
- send a Registration Reply to the mobile node with Code 133,
- including an Identification field computed in accordance with
- the rules specified in Section 5.6. The home agent MUST do
- no further processing with such a Request, though it SHOULD
- log the error as a security exception.
-
- c) If the home agent shares a mobility security association with
- the foreign agent, the home agent MUST check for the presence
- of a valid Foreign-Home Authentication Extension. Exactly
- one Foreign-Home Authentication Extension MUST be present in
- the Registration Request in this case, and the home agent
- MUST check the Authenticator value in the Extension. If no
- Foreign-Home Authentication Extension is found, or if more
- than one Foreign-Home Authentication Extension is found, or
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 50]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- if the Authenticator is invalid, the home agent MUST reject
- the mobile node's registration and SHOULD send a Registration
- Reply to the mobile node with Code 132. The home agent
- MUST then discard the Request and SHOULD log the error as a
- security exception.
-
- In addition to checking the authentication in the Registration
- Request, home agents MUST deny Registration Requests that are sent to
- the subnet-directed broadcast address of the home network (as opposed
- to being unicast to the home agent). The home agent MUST discard the
- Request and SHOULD returning a Registration Reply with a Code of 136.
- In this case, the Registration Reply will contain the home agent's
- unicast address, so that the mobile node can re-issue the
- Registration Request with the correct home agent address.
-
- 3.8.2.2. Accepting a Valid Request
-
- If the Registration Request satisfies the validity checks in Section
- 3.8.2.1, and the home agent is able to accommodate the Request, the
- home agent MUST update its mobility binding list for the requesting
- mobile node and MUST return a Registration Reply to the mobile node.
- In this case, the Reply Code will be either 0 if the home agent
- supports simultaneous mobility bindings, or 1 if it does not. See
- Section 3.8.3 for details on building the Registration Reply message.
-
- The home agent updates its record of the mobile node's mobility
- bindings as follows, based on the fields in the Registration Request:
-
- - If the Lifetime is zero and the Care-of Address equals the mobile
- node's home address, the home agent deletes all of the entries in
- the mobility binding list for the requesting mobile node. This
- is how a mobile node requests that its home agent cease providing
- mobility services.
-
- - If the Lifetime is zero and the Care-of Address does not equal
- the mobile node's home address, the home agent deletes only the
- entry containing the specified Care-of Address from the mobility
- binding list for the requesting mobile node. Any other active
- entries containing other care-of addresses will remain active.
-
- - If the Lifetime is nonzero, the home agent adds an entry
- containing the requested Care-of Address to the mobility binding
- list for the mobile node. If the 'S' bit is set and the home
- agent supports simultaneous mobility bindings, the previous
- mobility binding entries are retained. Otherwise, the home agent
- removes all previous entries in the mobility binding list for the
- mobile node.
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 51]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- In all cases, the home agent MUST send a Registration Reply to the
- source of the Registration Request, which might indeed be a different
- foreign agent than that whose care-of address is being
- (de)registered. If the home agent shares a mobility security
- association with the foreign agent whose care-of address is being
- deregistered, and that foreign agent is different from the one which
- relayed the Registration Request, the home agent MAY additionally
- send a Registration Reply to the foreign agent whose care-of address
- is being deregistered. The home agent MUST NOT send such a Reply if
- it does not share a mobility security association with the foreign
- agent. If no Reply is sent, the foreign agent's visitor list will
- expire naturally when the original Lifetime expires.
-
- The home agent MUST NOT increase the Lifetime above that specified by
- the mobile node in the Registration Request. However, it is not an
- error for the mobile node to request a Lifetime longer than the home
- agent is willing to accept. In this case, the home agent simply
- reduces the Lifetime to a permissible value and returns this value in
- the Registration Reply. The Lifetime value in the Registration Reply
- informs the mobile node of the granted lifetime of the registration,
- indicating when it SHOULD re-register in order to maintain continued
- service. After the expiration of this registration lifetime, the
- home agent MUST delete its entry for this registration in its
- mobility binding list.
-
- If the Registration Request duplicates an accepted current
- Registration Request, the new Lifetime MUST NOT extend beyond the
- Lifetime originally granted. A Registration Request is a duplicate
- if the home address, care-of address, and Identification fields all
- equal those of an accepted current registration.
-
- In addition, if the home network implements ARP [16], and the
- Registration Request asks the home agent to create a mobility binding
- for a mobile node which previously had no binding (the mobile node
- was previously assumed to be at home), then the home agent MUST
- follow the procedures described in Section 4.6 with regard to ARP,
- proxy ARP, and gratuitous ARP. If the mobile node already had a
- previous mobility binding, the home agent MUST continue to follow the
- rules for proxy ARP described in Section 4.6.
-
- 3.8.2.3. Denying an Invalid Request
-
- If the Registration Reply does not satisfy all of the validity checks
- in Section 3.8.2.1, or the home agent is unable to accommodate the
- Request, the home agent SHOULD return a Registration Reply to the
- mobile node with a Code that indicates the reason for the error. If
- a foreign agent was involved in relaying the Request, this allows the
- foreign agent to delete its pending visitor list entry. Also, this
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 52]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- informs the mobile node of the reason for the error such that it may
- attempt to fix the error and issue another Request.
-
- This section lists a number of reasons the home agent might reject a
- Request, and provides the Code value it should use in each instance.
- See Section 3.8.3 for additional details on building the Registration
- Reply message.
-
- Many reasons for rejecting a registration are administrative in
- nature. For example, a home agent can limit the number of
- simultaneous registrations for a mobile node, by rejecting any
- registrations that would cause its limit to be exceeded, and
- returning a Registration Reply with error code 135. Similarly, a
- home agent may refuse to grant service to mobile nodes which have
- entered unauthorized service areas by returning a Registration Reply
- with a Code of 129.
-
- If the Reserved field is nonzero, it MUST deny the Request with a
- Code of 134.
-
- 3.8.3. Sending Registration Replies
-
- If the home agent accepts a Registration Request, it then MUST update
- its record of the mobile node's mobility binding(s) and SHOULD send a
- Registration Reply with a suitable Code. Otherwise (the home agent
- has denied the Request), it SHOULD send a Registration Reply with an
- appropriate Code specifying the reason the Request was denied. The
- following sections provide additional detail for the values the home
- agent MUST supply in the fields of Registration Reply messages.
-
- 3.8.3.1. IP/UDP Fields
-
- This section provides the specific rules by which mobile nodes pick
- values for the IP and UDP header fields of a Registration Reply.
-
- IP Source Address
- Copied from the IP Destination Address of Registration
- Request, unless a multicast or broadcast address was
- used. If the IP Destination Address of the Registration
- Request was a broadcast or multicast address, the IP
- Source Address of the Registration Reply MUST be set to
- the home agent's (unicast) IP address.
-
- IP Destination Address
- Copied from the IP Source Address of the Registration
- Request.
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 53]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- UDP Source Port
- Copied from the UDP Destination Port of the Registration
- Request.
-
- UDP Destination Port
- Copied from the UDP Source Port of the Registration
- Request.
-
- When sending a Registration Reply in response to a Registration
- Request that requested deregistration of the mobile node (the
- Lifetime is zero and the Care-of Address equals the mobile node's
- home address) and in which the IP Source Address was also set to the
- mobile node's home address (this is the normal method used by a
- mobile node to deregister when it returns to its home network), the
- IP Destination Address in the Registration Reply will be set to the
- mobile node's home address, as copied from the IP Source Address of
- the Request.
-
- In this case, when transmitting the Registration Reply, the home
- agent MUST transmit the Reply directly onto the home network as if
- the mobile node were at home, bypassing any mobility binding list
- entry that may still exist at the home agent for the destination
- mobile node. In particular, for a mobile node returning home after
- being registered with a care-of address, if the mobile node's new
- Registration Request is not accepted by the home agent, the mobility
- binding list entry for the mobile node will still indicate that
- datagrams addressed to the mobile node should be tunneled to the
- mobile node's registered care-of address; when sending the
- Registration Reply indicating the rejection of this Request, this
- existing binding list entry MUST be ignored, and the home agent MUST
- transmit this Reply as if the mobile node were at home.
-
- 3.8.3.2. Registration Reply Fields
-
- This section provides specific rules by which home agents pick values
- for the fields within the fixed portion of a Registration Reply. The
- Code field of the Registration Reply is chosen in accordance with the
- rules specified in the previous sections. When replying to an
- accepted registration, a home agent SHOULD respond with Code 1 if it
- does not support simultaneous registrations.
-
- The Lifetime field MUST be copied from the corresponding field in the
- Registration Request, unless the requested value is greater than the
- maximum length of time the home agent is willing to provide the
- requested service. In such a case, the Lifetime MUST be set to the
- length of time that service will actually be provided by the home
- agent. This reduced Lifetime SHOULD be the maximum Lifetime allowed
- by the home agent (for this mobile node and care-of address).
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 54]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- The Home Address field MUST be copied from the corresponding field in
- the Registration Request.
-
- If the Home Agent field in the Registration Request contains a
- unicast address of this home agent, then that field MUST be copied
- into the Home Agent field of the Registration Reply. Otherwise, the
- home agent MUST set the Home Agent field in the Registration Reply to
- its unicast address. In this latter case, the home agent MUST reject
- the registration with a suitable code (e.g., Code 136) to prevent the
- mobile node from possibly being simultaneously registered with two or
- more home agents.
-
- 3.8.3.3. Extensions
-
- This section describes the ordering of any required and any optional
- Mobile IP Extensions that a home agent appends to a Registration
- Reply. The following ordering MUST be followed:
-
- a) The IP header, followed by the UDP header, followed by the
- fixed-length portion of the Registration Reply,
-
- b) If present, any non-authentication Extensions used by the
- mobile node (which may or may not also be used by the foreign
- agent),
-
- c) The Mobile-Home Authentication Extension,
-
- d) If present, any non-authentication Extensions used only by
- the foreign agent, and
-
- e) The Foreign-Home Authentication Extension, if present.
-
- Note that items (a) and (c) MUST appear in every Registration Reply
- sent by the home agent. Items (b), (d), and (e) are optional.
- However, item (e) MUST be included when the home agent and the
- foreign agent share a mobility security association.
-
- 4. Routing Considerations
-
- This section describes how mobile nodes, home agents, and (possibly)
- foreign agents cooperate to route datagrams to/from mobile nodes that
- are connected to a foreign network. The mobile node informs its home
- agent of its current location using the registration procedure
- described in Section 3. See the protocol overview in Section 1.7 for
- the relative locations of the mobile node's home address with respect
- to its home agent, and the mobile node itself with respect to any
- foreign agent with which it might attempt to register.
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 55]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 4.1. Encapsulation Types
-
- Home agents and foreign agents MUST support tunneling datagrams using
- IP in IP encapsulation [14]. Any mobile node that uses a co-located
- care-of address MUST support receiving datagrams tunneled using IP in
- IP encapsulation. Minimal encapsulation [15] and GRE encapsulation
- [8] are alternate encapsulation methods which MAY optionally be
- supported by mobility agents and mobile nodes. The use of these
- alternative forms of encapsulation, when requested by the mobile
- node, is otherwise at the discretion of the home agent.
-
- 4.2. Unicast Datagram Routing
-
- 4.2.1. Mobile Node Considerations
-
- When connected to its home network, a mobile node operates without
- the support of mobility services. That is, it operates in the same
- way as any other (fixed) host or router. The method by which a
- mobile node selects a default router when connected to its home
- network, or when away from home and using a co-located care-of
- address, is outside the scope of this document. ICMP Router
- Advertisement [4] is one such method.
-
- When registered on a foreign network, the mobile node chooses a
- default router by the following rules:
-
- - If the mobile node is registered using a foreign agent care-of
- address, then the mobile node MUST choose its default router
- from among the Router Addresses advertised in the ICMP Router
- Advertisement portion of that Agent Advertisement message. The
- mobile node MAY also consider the IP source address of the Agent
- Advertisement as another possible choice for the IP address of a
- default router, along with the (possibly empty) list of Router
- Addresses from the ICMP Router Advertisement portion of the
- message. In such cases, the IP source address MUST be considered
- to be the worst choice (lowest preference) for a default router.
-
- - If the mobile node is registered directly with its home agent
- using a co-located care-of address, then the mobile node SHOULD
- choose its default router from among those advertised in any
- ICMP Router Advertisement message that it receives for which
- its externally obtained care-of address and the Router Address
- match under the network prefix. If the mobile node's externally
- obtained care-of address matches the IP source address of the
- Agent Advertisement under the network prefix, the mobile node
- MAY also consider that IP source address as another possible
- choice for the IP address of a default router, along with the
- (possibly empty) list of Router Addresses from the ICMP Router
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 56]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Advertisement portion of the message. If so, the IP source
- address MUST be considered to be the worst choice (lowest
- preference) for a default router. The network prefix MAY
- be obtained from the Prefix-Lengths Extension in the Router
- Advertisement, if present. The prefix MAY also be obtained
- through other mechanisms beyond the scope of this document.
-
- Beyond these rules, the actual selection of the default router is
- made by the selection method specified for ICMP Router Discovery [4],
- among the Router Addresses specified above. In any case, a mobile
- node registered via a foreign agent MAY choose its foreign agent as a
- default router.
-
- Note that Van Jacobson header compression [10] will not function
- properly unless all TCP IP datagrams to and from the mobile node
- pass, respectively, through the same first and last-hop router. The
- mobile node, therefore, MUST select its foreign agent as its default
- router if it performs Van Jacobson header compression with its
- foreign agent.
-
- 4.2.2. Foreign Agent Considerations
-
- Upon receipt of an encapsulated datagram sent to its advertised
- care-of address, a foreign agent MUST compare the inner destination
- address to those entries in its visitor list. When the destination
- does not match the address of any mobile node currently in the
- visitor list, the foreign agent MUST NOT forward the datagram without
- modifications to the original IP header, because otherwise a routing
- loop is likely to result. The datagram SHOULD be silently discarded.
- ICMP Destination Unreachable MUST NOT be sent when a foreign agent is
- unable to forward an incoming tunneled datagram. Otherwise, the
- foreign agent forwards the decapsulated datagram to the mobile node.
-
- The foreign agent MUST NOT advertise to other routers in its routing
- domain, nor to any other mobile node, the presence of a mobile router
- (Section 4.5).
-
- The foreign agent MUST route datagrams it receives from registered
- mobile nodes. At a minimum, this means that the foreign agent must
- verify the IP Header Checksum, decrement the IP Time To Live,
- recompute the IP Header Checksum, and forward such datagrams to a
- default router. In addition, the foreign agent SHOULD send an
- appropriate ICMP Redirect message to the mobile node.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 57]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 4.2.3. Home Agent Considerations
-
- The home agent MUST be able to intercept any datagrams on the home
- network addressed to the mobile node while the mobile node is
- registered away from home. Proxy and gratuitous ARP MAY be used in
- enabling this interception, as specified in Section 4.6.
-
- The home agent must examine the IP Destination Address of all
- arriving datagrams to see if it is equal to the home address of any
- of its mobile nodes registered away from home. If so, the home agent
- tunnels the datagram to the mobile node's currently registered care-
- of address or addresses. If the home agent supports the optional
- capability of multiple simultaneous mobility bindings, it tunnels a
- copy to each care-of address in the mobile node's mobility binding
- list. If the mobile node has no current mobility bindings, the home
- agent MUST NOT attempt to intercept datagrams destined for the mobile
- node, and thus will not in general receive such datagrams. However,
- if the home agent is also a router handling common IP traffic, it is
- possible that it will receive such datagrams for forwarding onto the
- home network. In this case, the home agent MUST assume the mobile
- node is at home and simply forward the datagram directly onto the
- home network.
-
- See Section 4.1 regarding methods of encapsulation that may be used
- for tunneling. Nodes implementing tunneling SHOULD also implement
- the "tunnel soft state" mechanism [14], which allows ICMP error
- messages returned from the tunnel to correctly be reflected back to
- the original senders of the tunneled datagrams.
-
- Home agents SHOULD be able to decapsulate and further deliver packets
- addressed to themselves, sent by a mobile node for the purpose of
- maintaining location privacy, as described in Section 5.5.
-
- If the Lifetime for a given mobility binding expires before the home
- agent has received another valid Registration Request for that mobile
- node, then that binding is deleted from the mobility binding list.
- The home agent MUST NOT send any Registration Reply message simply
- because the mobile node's binding has expired. The entry in the
- visitor list of the mobile node's current foreign agent will expire
- naturally, probably at the same time as the binding expired at the
- home agent. When a mobility binding's lifetime expires, the home
- agent MUST delete the binding, but it MUST retain any other (non-
- expired) simultaneous mobility bindings that it holds for the mobile
- node.
-
- When a home agent receives a datagram, intercepted for one of its
- mobile nodes registered away from home, the home agent MUST examine
- the datagram to check if it is already encapsulated. If so, special
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 58]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- rules apply in the forwarding of that datagram to the mobile node:
-
- - If the inner (encapsulated) Destination Address is the same
- as the outer Destination Address (the mobile node), then the
- home agent MUST also examine the outer Source Address of the
- encapsulated datagram (the source address of the tunnel). If
- this outer Source Address is the same as the mobile node's
- current care-of address, the home agent MUST silently discard
- that datagram in order to prevent a likely routing loop. If,
- instead, the outer Source Address is NOT the same as the mobile
- node's current care-of address, then the home agent SHOULD
- forward the datagram to the mobile node. In order to forward
- the datagram in this case, the home agent MAY simply alter the
- outer Destination Address to the care-of address, rather than
- re-encapsulating the datagram.
-
- - Otherwise (the inner Destination Address is NOT the same as the
- outer Destination Address), the home agent SHOULD encapsulate
- the datagram again (recursive encapsulation), with the new outer
- Destination Address set equal to the mobile node's care-of
- address. That is, the home agent forwards the entire datagram
- to the mobile node in the same way as any other datagram
- (encapsulated already or not).
-
- 4.3. Broadcast Datagrams
-
- When a home agent receives a broadcast datagram, it MUST NOT forward
- the datagram to any mobile nodes in its mobility binding list other
- than those that have requested forwarding of broadcast datagrams. A
- mobile node MAY request forwarding of broadcast datagrams by setting
- the 'B' bit in its Registration Request message (Section 3.3). For
- each such registered mobile node, the home agent SHOULD forward
- received broadcast datagrams to the mobile node, although it is a
- matter of configuration at the home agent as to which specific
- categories of broadcast datagrams will be forwarded to such mobile
- nodes.
-
- If the 'D' bit was set in the mobile node's Registration Request
- message, indicating that the mobile node is using a co-located care-
- of address, the home agent simply tunnels appropriate broadcast IP
- datagrams to the mobile node's care-of address. Otherwise (the 'D'
- bit was NOT set), the home agent first encapsulates the broadcast
- datagram in a unicast datagram addressed to the mobile node's home
- address, and then tunnels this encapsulated datagram to the foreign
- agent. This extra level of encapsulation is required so that the
- foreign agent can determine which mobile node should receive the
- datagram after it is decapsulated. When received by the foreign
- agent, the unicast encapsulated datagram is detunneled and delivered
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 59]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- to the mobile node in the same way as any other datagram. In either
- case, the mobile node must decapsulate the datagram it receives in
- order to recover the original broadcast datagram.
-
- 4.4. Multicast Datagram Routing
-
- As mentioned previously, a mobile node that is connected to its home
- network functions in the same way as any other (fixed) host or
- router. Thus, when it is at home, a mobile node functions
- identically to other multicast senders and receivers. This section
- therefore describes the behavior of a mobile node that is visiting a
- foreign network.
-
- In order receive multicasts, a mobile node MUST join the multicast
- group in one of two ways. First, a mobile node MAY join the group
- via a (local) multicast router on the visited subnet. This option
- assumes that there is a multicast router present on the visited
- subnet. If the mobile node is using a co-located care-of address, it
- SHOULD use this address as the source IP address of its IGMP [5]
- messages. Otherwise, it MUST use its home address.
-
- Alternatively, a mobile node which wishes to receive multicasts MAY
- join groups via a bi-directional tunnel to its home agent, assuming
- that its home agent is a multicast router. The mobile node tunnels
- IGMP messages to its home agent and the home agent forwards multicast
- datagrams down the tunnel to the mobile node. The rules for
- multicast datagram delivery to mobile nodes in this case are
- identical to those for broadcast datagrams (Section 4.3). Namely, if
- the mobile node is using a co-located care-of address (the 'D' bit
- was set in the mobile node's Registration Request), then the home
- agent SHOULD tunnel the datagram to this care-of address; otherwise,
- the home agent MUST first encapsulate the datagram in a unicast
- datagram addressed to the mobile node's home address and then MUST
- tunnel the resulting datagram (recursive tunneling) to the mobile
- node's care-of address.
-
- A mobile node that wishes to send datagrams to a multicast group also
- has two options: (1) send directly on the visited network; or (2)
- send via a tunnel to its home agent. Because multicast routing in
- general depends upon the IP source address, a mobile node which sends
- multicast datagrams directly on the visited network MUST use a co-
- located care-of address as the IP source address. Similarly, a
- mobile node which tunnels a multicast datagram to its home agent MUST
- use its home address as the IP source address of both the (inner)
- multicast datagram and the (outer) encapsulating datagram. This
- second option assumes that the home agent is a multicast router.
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 60]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 4.5. Mobile Routers
-
- A mobile node can be a router, which is responsible for the mobility
- of one or more entire networks moving together, perhaps on an
- airplane, a ship, a train, an automobile, a bicycle, or a kayak. The
- nodes connected to a network served by the mobile router may
- themselves be fixed nodes or mobile nodes or routers. In this
- document, such networks are called "mobile networks".
-
- A mobile router MAY act as a foreign agent and provide a foreign
- agent care-of address to mobile nodes connected to the mobile
- network. Typical routing to a mobile node via a mobile router in
- this case is illustrated by the following example:
-
- a) A laptop computer is disconnected from its home network and
- later attached to a network port in the seat back of an
- aircraft. The laptop computer uses Mobile IP to register on
- this foreign network, using a foreign agent care-of address
- discovered through an Agent Advertisement from the aircraft's
- foreign agent.
-
- b) The aircraft network is itself mobile. Suppose the node
- serving as the foreign agent on the aircraft also serves as
- the default router that connects the aircraft network to the
- rest of the Internet. When the aircraft is at home, this
- router is attached to some fixed network at the airline's
- headquarters, which is the router's home network. While
- the aircraft is in flight, this router registers from time
- to time over its radio link with a series of foreign agents
- below it on the ground. This router's home agent is a node
- on the fixed network at the airline's headquarters.
-
- c) Some correspondent node sends a datagram to the laptop
- computer, addressing the datagram to the laptop's home
- address. This datagram is initially routed to the laptop's
- home network.
-
- d) The laptop's home agent intercepts the datagram on the home
- network and tunnels it to the laptop's care-of address, which
- in this example is an address of the node serving as router
- and foreign agent on the aircraft. Normal IP routing will
- route the datagram to the fixed network at the airline's
- headquarters.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 61]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- e) The aircraft router and foreign agent's home agent there
- intercepts the datagram and tunnels it to its current care-of
- address, which in this example is some foreign agent on the
- ground below the aircraft. The original datagram from the
- correspondent node has now been encapsulated twice: once
- by the laptop's home agent and again by the aircraft's home
- agent.
-
- f) The foreign agent on the ground decapsulates the datagram,
- yielding a datagram still encapsulated by the laptop's home
- agent, with a destination address of the laptop's care-of
- address. The ground foreign agent sends the resulting
- datagram over its radio link to the aircraft.
-
- g) The foreign agent on the aircraft decapsulates the datagram,
- yielding the original datagram from the correspondent node,
- with a destination address of the laptop's home address.
- The aircraft foreign agent delivers the datagram over the
- aircraft network to the laptop's link-layer address.
-
- This example illustrated the case in which a mobile node is attached
- to a mobile network. That is, the mobile node is mobile with respect
- to the network, which itself is also mobile (here with respect to the
- ground). If, instead, the node is fixed with respect to the mobile
- network (the mobile network is the fixed node's home network), then
- either of two methods may be used to cause datagrams from
- correspondent nodes to be routed to the fixed node.
-
- A home agent MAY be configured to have a permanent registration for
- the fixed node, that indicates the mobile router's address as the
- fixed host's care-of address. The mobile router's home agent will
- usually be used for this purpose. The home agent is then responsible
- for advertising connectivity using normal routing protocols to the
- fixed node. Any datagrams sent to the fixed node will thus use
- recursive tunneling as described above.
-
- Alternatively, the mobile router MAY advertise connectivity to the
- entire mobile network using normal IP routing protocols through a
- bi-directional tunnel to its own home agent. This method avoids the
- need for recursive tunneling of datagrams.
-
- 4.6. ARP, Proxy ARP, and Gratuitous ARP
-
- The use of ARP [16] requires special rules for correct operation when
- wireless or mobile nodes are involved. The requirements specified in
- this section apply to all home networks in which ARP is used for
- address resolution.
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 62]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- In addition to the normal use of ARP for resolving a target node's
- link-layer address from its IP address, this document distinguishes
- two special uses of ARP:
-
- - A Proxy ARP [18] is an ARP Reply sent by one node on behalf
- of another node which is either unable or unwilling to answer
- its own ARP Requests. The sender of a Proxy ARP reverses the
- Sender and Target Protocol Address fields as described in [16],
- but supplies some configured link-layer address (generally, its
- own) in the Sender Hardware Address field. The node receiving
- the Reply will then associate this link-layer address with the
- IP address of the original target node, causing it to transmit
- future datagrams for this target node to the node with that
- link-layer address.
-
- - A Gratuitous ARP [23] is an ARP packet sent by a node in order to
- spontaneously cause other nodes to update an entry in their ARP
- cache. A gratuitous ARP MAY use either an ARP Request or an ARP
- Reply packet. In either case, the ARP Sender Protocol Address
- and ARP Target Protocol Address are both set to the IP address
- of the cache entry to be updated, and the ARP Sender Hardware
- Address is set to the link-layer address to which this cache
- entry should be updated. When using an ARP Reply packet, the
- Target Hardware Address is also set to the link-layer address to
- which this cache entry should be updated (this field is not used
- in an ARP Request packet).
-
- In either case, for a gratuitous ARP, the ARP packet MUST be
- transmitted as a local broadcast packet on the local link. As
- specified in [16], any node receiving any ARP packet (Request or
- Reply) MUST update its local ARP cache with the Sender Protocol
- and Hardware Addresses in the ARP packet, if the receiving node
- has an entry for that IP address already in its ARP cache. This
- requirement in the ARP protocol applies even for ARP Request
- packets, and for ARP Reply packets that do not match any ARP
- Request transmitted by the receiving node [16].
-
- While a mobile node is registered on a foreign network, its home
- agent uses proxy ARP [18] to reply to ARP Requests it receives that
- seek the mobile node's link-layer address. When receiving an ARP
- Request, the home agent MUST examine the target IP address of the
- Request, and if this IP address matches the home address of any
- mobile node for which it has a registered mobility binding, the home
- agent MUST transmit an ARP Reply on behalf of the mobile node. After
- exchanging the sender and target addresses in the packet [18], the
- home agent MUST set the sender link-layer address in the packet to
- the link-layer address of its own interface over which the Reply will
- be sent.
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 63]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- When a mobile node leaves its home network and registers a binding on
- a foreign network, its home agent uses gratuitous ARP to update the
- ARP caches of nodes on the home network. This causes such nodes to
- associate the link-layer address of the home agent with the mobile
- node's home (IP) address. When registering a binding for a mobile
- node for which the home agent previously had no binding (the mobile
- node was assumed to be at home), the home agent MUST transmit a
- gratuitous ARP on behalf of the mobile node. This gratuitous ARP
- packet MUST be transmitted as a broadcast packet on the link on which
- the mobile node's home address is located. Since broadcasts on the
- local link (such as Ethernet) are typically not guaranteed to be
- reliable, the gratuitous ARP packet SHOULD be retransmitted a small
- number of times to increase its reliability.
-
- When a mobile node returns to its home network, the mobile node
- and its home agent use gratuitous ARP to cause all nodes on the
- mobile node's home network to update their ARP caches to once again
- associate the mobile node's own link-layer address with the mobile
- node's home (IP) address. Before transmitting the (de)Registration
- Request message to its home agent, the mobile node MUST transmit this
- gratuitous ARP on its home network as a local broadcast on this link.
- The gratuitous ARP packet SHOULD be retransmitted a small number of
- times to increase its reliability, but these retransmissions SHOULD
- proceed in parallel with the transmission and processing of its
- (de)Registration Request.
-
- When the mobile node's home agent receives and accepts this
- (de)Registration Request, the home agent MUST also transmit a
- gratuitous ARP on the mobile node's home network. This gratuitous
- ARP also is used to associate the mobile node's home address with
- the mobile node's own link-layer address. A gratuitous ARP is
- transmitted by both the mobile node and its home agent, since in the
- case of wireless network interfaces, the area within transmission
- range of the mobile node will likely differ from that within range
- of its its home agent. Th ARP packet from the home agent MUST be
- transmitted as a local broadcast on the mobile node's home link,
- and SHOULD be retransmitted a small number of times to increase
- its reliability; these retransmissions, however, SHOULD proceed in
- parallel with the transmission and processing of its (de)Registration
- Reply.
-
- While the mobile node is away from home, it MUST NOT transmit any
- broadcast ARP Request or ARP Reply messages. Finally, while the
- mobile node is away from home, it MUST NOT reply to ARP Requests
- in which the target IP address is its own home address, unless the
- ARP Request is sent by a foreign agent with which the mobile node
- is attempting to register or a foreign agent with which the mobile
- node has an unexpired registration. In the latter case, the mobile
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 64]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- node MUST use a unicast ARP Reply to respond to the foreign agent.
- Note that if the mobile node is using a co-located care-of address
- and receives an ARP Request in which the target IP address is this
- care-of address, then the mobile node SHOULD reply to this ARP
- Request. Note also that, when transmitting a Registration Request on
- a foreign network, a mobile node may discover the link-layer address
- of a foreign agent by storing the address as it is received from the
- Agent Advertisement from that foreign agent, but not by transmitting
- a broadcast ARP Request message.
-
- The specific order in which each of the above requirements for the
- use of ARP, proxy ARP, and gratuitous ARP are applied, relative to
- the transmission and processing of the mobile node's Registration
- Request and Registration Reply messages when leaving home or
- returning home, are important to the correct operation of the
- protocol.
-
- To summarize the above requirements, when a mobile node leaves its
- home network, the following steps, in this order, MUST be performed:
-
- - The mobile node decides to register away from home, perhaps
- because it has received an Agent Advertisement from a foreign
- agent and has not recently received one from its home agent.
-
- - Before transmitting the Registration Request, the mobile node
- disables its own future processing of any ARP Requests it
- may subsequently receive requesting the link-layer address
- corresponding to its home address, except insofar as necessary to
- communicate with foreign agents on visited networks.
-
- - The mobile node transmits its Registration Request.
-
- - When the mobile node's home agent receives and accepts the
- Registration Request, it performs a gratuitous ARP on behalf
- of the mobile node, and begins using proxy ARP to reply to ARP
- Requests that it receives requesting the mobile node's link-layer
- address. If, instead, the home agent rejects the Registration
- Request, no ARP processing (gratuitous nor proxy) is performed by
- the home agent.
-
- When a mobile node later returns to its home network, the following
- steps, in this order, MUST be performed:
-
- - The mobile node decides to register at home, perhaps because it
- has received an Agent Advertisement from its home agent.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 65]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- - Before transmitting the Registration Request, the mobile node
- re-enables its own future processing of any ARP Requests it may
- subsequently receive requesting its link-layer address.
-
- - The mobile node performs a gratuitous ARP for itself.
-
- - The mobile node transmits its Registration Request.
-
- - When the mobile node's home agent receives and accepts the
- Registration Request, it stops using proxy ARP to reply to
- ARP Requests that it receives requesting the mobile node's
- link-layer address, and then performs a gratuitous ARP on behalf
- of the mobile node. If, instead, the home agent rejects the
- Registration Request, no ARP processing (gratuitous nor proxy) is
- performed by the home agent.
-
- 5. Security Considerations
-
- The mobile computing environment is potentially very different from
- the ordinary computing environment. In many cases, mobile computers
- will be connected to the network via wireless links. Such links are
- particularly vulnerable to passive eavesdropping, active replay
- attacks, and other active attacks.
-
- 5.1. Message Authentication Codes
-
- Home agents and mobile nodes MUST be able to perform authentication.
- The default algorithm is keyed MD5 [21], with a key size of 128 bits.
- The default mode of operation is to both precede and follow the data
- to be hashed, by the 128-bit key; that is, MD5 is to be used in
- "prefix+suffix" mode. The foreign agent MUST also support
- authentication using keyed MD5 and key sizes of 128 bits or greater,
- with manual key distribution. More authentication algorithms,
- algorithm modes, key distribution methods, and key sizes MAY also be
- supported.
-
- 5.2. Areas of Security Concern in this Protocol
-
- The registration protocol described in this document will result in a
- mobile node's traffic being tunneled to its care-of address. This
- tunneling feature could be a significant vulnerability if the
- registration were not authenticated. Such remote redirection, for
- instance as performed by the mobile registration protocol, is widely
- understood to be a security problem in the current Internet if not
- authenticated [2]. Moreover, the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP)
- is not authenticated, and can potentially be used to steal another
- host's traffic. The use of "Gratuitous ARP" (Section 4.6) brings
- with it all of the risks associated with the use of ARP.
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 66]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 5.3. Key Management
-
- This specification requires a strong authentication mechanism (keyed
- MD5) which precludes many potential attacks based on the Mobile IP
- registration protocol. However, because key distribution is
- difficult in the absence of a network key management protocol,
- messages with the foreign agent are not all required to be
- authenticated. In a commercial environment it might be important to
- authenticate all messages between the foreign agent and the home
- agent, so that billing is possible, and service providers do not
- provide service to users that are not legitimate customers of that
- service provider.
-
- 5.4. Picking Good Random Numbers
-
- The strength of any authentication mechanism depends on several
- factors, including the innate strength of the authentication
- algorithm, the secrecy of the key used, the strength of the key used,
- and the quality of the particular implementation. This specification
- requires implementation of keyed MD5 for authentication, but does not
- preclude the use of other authentication algorithms and modes. For
- keyed MD5 authentication to be useful, the 128-bit key must be both
- secret (that is, known only to authorized parties) and pseudo-random.
- If nonces are used in connection with replay protection, they must
- also be selected carefully. Eastlake, et al. [7] provides more
- information on generating pseudo-random numbers.
-
- 5.5. Privacy
-
- Users who have sensitive data that they do not wish others to see
- should use mechanisms outside the scope of this document (such as
- encryption) to provide appropriate protection. Users concerned about
- traffic analysis should consider appropriate use of link encryption.
- If absolute location privacy is desired, the mobile node can create a
- tunnel to its home agent. Then, datagrams destined for correspondent
- nodes will appear to emanate from the home network, and it may be
- more difficult to pinpoint the location of the mobile node. Such
- mechanisms are all beyond the scope of this document.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 67]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 5.6. Replay Protection for Registration Requests
-
- The Identification field is used to let the home agent verify that a
- registration message has been freshly generated by the mobile node,
- not replayed by an attacker from some previous registration. Two
- methods are described in this section: timestamps (mandatory) and
- "nonces" (optional). All mobile nodes and home agents MUST implement
- timestamp-based replay protection. These nodes MAY also implement
- nonce-based replay protection (but see Appendix A.2 for a patent that
- may apply to nonce-based replay protection).
-
- The style of replay protection in effect between a mobile node and
- its home agent is part of the mobile security association. A mobile
- node and its home agent MUST agree on which method of replay
- protection will be used. The interpretation of the Identification
- field depends on the method of replay protection as described in the
- subsequent subsections.
-
- Whatever method is used, the low-order 32 bits of the Identification
- MUST be copied unchanged from the Registration Request to the Reply.
- The foreign agent uses those bits (and the mobile node's home
- address) to match Registration Requests with corresponding replies.
- The mobile node MUST verify that the low-order 32 bits of any
- Registration Reply are identical to the bits it sent in the
- Registration Request.
-
- The Identification in a new Registration Request MUST NOT be the same
- as in an immediately preceding Request, and SHOULD NOT repeat while
- the same security context is being used between the mobile node and
- the home agent. Retransmission as in Section 3.6.3 is allowed.
-
- 5.6.1. Replay Protection using Timestamps
-
- The basic principle of timestamp replay protection is that the node
- generating a message inserts the current time of day, and the node
- receiving the message checks that this timestamp is sufficiently
- close to its own time of day. Obviously the two nodes must have
- adequately synchronized time-of-day clocks. As with any messages,
- time synchronization messages may be protected against tampering by
- an authentication mechanism determined by the security context
- between the two nodes.
-
- If timestamps are used, the mobile node MUST set the Identification
- field to a 64-bit value formatted as specified by the Network Time
- Protocol [13]. The low-order 32 bits of the NTP format represent
- fractional seconds, and those bits which are not available from a
- time source SHOULD be generated from a good source of randomness.
- Note, however, that when using timestamps, the 64-bit Identification
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 68]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- used in a Registration Request from the mobile node MUST be greater
- than that used in any previous Registration Request, as the home
- agent uses this field also as a sequence number. Without such a
- sequence number, it would be possible for a delayed duplicate of an
- earlier Registration Request to arrive at the home agent (within the
- clock synchronization required by the home agent), and thus be
- applied out of order, mistakenly altering the mobile node's current
- registered care-of address.
-
- Upon receipt of a Registration Request with a valid Mobile-Home
- Authentication Extension, the home agent MUST check the
- Identification field for validity. In order to be valid, the
- timestamp contained in the Identification field MUST be close enough
- to the home agent's time of day clock and the timestamp MUST be
- greater than all previously accepted timestamps for the requesting
- mobile node. Time tolerances and resynchronization details are
- specific to a particular mobility security association.
-
- If the timestamp is valid, the home agent copies the entire
- Identification field into the Registration Reply it returns the Reply
- to the mobile node. If the timestamp is not valid, the home agent
- copies only the low-order 32 bits into the Registration Reply, and
- supplies the high-order 32 bits from its own time of day. In this
- latter case, the home agent MUST reject the registration by returning
- Code 133 (identification mismatch) in the Registration Reply.
-
- As described in Section 3.6.2.1, the mobile node MUST verify that the
- low-order 32 bits of the Identification in the Registration Reply are
- identical to those in the rejected registration attempt, before using
- the high-order bits for clock resynchronization.
-
- 5.6.2. Replay Protection using Nonces
-
- Implementors of this optional mechanism should examine Appendix A.2
- for a patent that may be applicable to nonce-based replay protection.
-
- The basic principle of nonce replay protection is that node A
- includes a new random number in every message to node B, and checks
- that node B returns that same number in its next message to node A.
- Both messages use an authentication code to protect against
- alteration by an attacker. At the same time node B can send its own
- nonces in all messages to node A (to be echoed by node A), so that it
- too can verify that it is receiving fresh messages.
-
- The home agent may be expected to have resources for computing
- pseudo-random numbers useful as nonces [7]. It inserts a new nonce
- as the high-order 32 bits of the identification field of every
- Registration Reply. The home agent copies the low-order 32 bits of
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 69]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- the Identification from the Registration Request message into the
- low-order 32 bits of the Identification in the Registration Reply.
- When the mobile node receives an authenticated Registration Reply
- from the home agent, it saves the high-order 32 bits of the
- identification for use as the high-order 32 bits of its next
- Registration Request.
-
- The mobile node is responsible for generating the low-order 32 bits
- of the Identification in each Registration Request. Ideally it
- should generate its own random nonces. However it may use any
- expedient method, including duplication of the random value sent by
- the home agent. The method chosen is of concern only to the mobile
- node, because it is the node that checks for valid values in the
- Registration Reply. The high-order and low-order 32 bits of the
- identification chosen SHOULD both differ from their previous values.
- The home agent uses a new high-order value and the mobile node uses a
- new low-order value for each registration message. The foreign agent
- uses the low-order value (and the mobile host's home address) to
- correctly match registration replies with pending Requests (Section
- 3.7.1).
-
- If a registration message is rejected because of an invalid nonce,
- the Reply always provides the mobile node with a new nonce to be used
- in the next registration. Thus the nonce protocol is self-
- synchronizing.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 70]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- 6. Acknowledgments
-
- Special thanks to Steve Deering (Xerox PARC), along with Dan Duchamp
- and John Ioannidis (JI) (Columbia), for forming the working group,
- chairing it, and putting so much effort into its early development.
-
- Thanks also to Kannan Alaggapan, Greg Minshall, and Tony Li for their
- contributions to the group while performing the duties of
- chairperson, as well as for their many useful comments.
-
- Thanks to the active members of the Mobile IP Working Group,
- particularly those who contributed text, including (in alphabetical
- order)
-
- - Ran Atkinson (Naval Research Lab),
- - Dave Johnson (Carnegie Mellon University),
- - Frank Kastenholz (FTP Software),
- - Anders Klemets (KTH),
- - Chip Maguire (KTH),
- - Andrew Myles (Macquarie University),
- - Al Quirt (Bell Northern Research),
- - Yakov Rekhter (IBM), and
- - Fumio Teraoka (Sony).
-
- Thanks to Charlie Kunzinger and to Bill Simpson, the editors who
- produced the first drafts for of this document, reflecting the
- discussions of the Working Group. Much of the new text of this memo
- is due to Jim Solomon and Dave Johnson.
-
- Thanks to Greg Minshall (Novell), Phil Karn (Qualcomm), and Frank
- Kastenholz (FTP Software) for their generous support in hosting
- interim Working Group meetings.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 71]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- A. Patent Issues
-
- As of the time of publication, the IETF had been made aware of two
- patents that may be relevant to implementors of the protocol
- described in this technical specification.
-
- A.1. IBM Patent #5,159,592
-
- Charles Perkins, editor of this memo, is sole inventor of U.S. Patent
- No. 5,159,592, assigned to IBM. In a letter dated May 30, 1995, IBM
- brought this patent to the attention of the IETF, stating that this
- patent "relates to the Mobile IP." We understand that IBM did not
- intend to assert that any particular implementation of Mobile IP
- would or would not infringe the patent, but rather that IBM was
- meeting what it viewed as a duty to disclose information that could
- be relevant to the process of adopting a standard.
-
- Based on a review of the claims of the patent, IETF believes that a
- system of registering an address obtained from a foreign agent, as
- described in the document, would not necessarily infringe any of the
- claims of the patent; and that a system in which an address is
- obtained elsewhere and then registered can be implemented without
- necessarily infringing any claims of the patent. Accordingly, our
- view is that the proposed protocol can be implemented without
- necessarily infringing the Perkins Patent.
-
- Parties considering adopting this protocol must be aware that some
- specific implementations, or features added to otherwise non-
- infringing implementations, may raise an issue of infringement with
- respect to this patent or to some other patent.
-
- This statement is for the IETF's assistance in its standard-setting
- procedure, and should not be relied upon by any party as an opinion
- or guarantee that any implementation it might make or use would not
- be covered by the Perkins Patent and any other patents. In
- particular, IBM might disagree with the interpretation of this patent
- described herein.
-
- A.2. IBM Patent #5,148,479
-
- This patent, also assigned to IBM, may be relevant to those who
- implement nonce-based replay protection as described in Section
- 5.6.2. Note that nonce-based replay protection is an optional
- feature of this specification. Timestamp-based replay protection, on
- the other hand, (Section 5.6.1) is a requirement of this
- specification.
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 72]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- B. Link-Layer Considerations
-
- The mobile node MAY use link-layer mechanisms to decide that its
- point of attachment has changed. Such indications include the
- Down/Testing/Up interface status [11], and changes in cell or
- administration. The mechanisms will be specific to the particular
- link-layer technology, and are outside the scope of this document.
-
- The Point-to-Point-Protocol (PPP) [22] and its Internet Protocol
- Control Protocol (IPCP) [12], negotiates the use of IP addresses.
-
- The mobile node SHOULD first attempt to specify its home address, so
- that if the mobile node is attaching to its home network, the
- unrouted link will function correctly. When the home address is not
- accepted by the peer, but a transient IP address is dynamically
- assigned to the mobile node, and the mobile node is capable of
- supporting a co-located care-of address, the mobile node MAY register
- that address as a co-located care-of address. When the peer
- specifies its own IP address, that address MUST NOT be assumed to be
- a foreign agent care-of address or the IP address of a home agent.
-
- C. TCP Considerations
-
- C.1. TCP Timers
-
- Most hosts and routers which implement TCP/IP do not permit easy
- configuration of the TCP timer values. When high-delay (e.g.,
- SATCOM) or low-bandwidth (e.g., High-Frequency Radio) links are in
- use, the default TCP timer values in many systems may cause
- retransmissions or timeouts, even when the link and network are
- actually operating properly with greater than usual delays because of
- the medium in use. This can cause an inability to create or maintain
- TCP connections over such links, and can also cause unneeded
- retransmissions which consume already scarce bandwidth. Vendors are
- encouraged to make TCP timers more configurable. Vendors of systems
- designed for the mobile computing markets should pick default timer
- values more suited to low-bandwidth, high-delay links. Users of
- mobile nodes should be sensitive to the possibility of timer-related
- difficulties.
-
- C.2. TCP Congestion Management
-
- Mobile nodes often use media which are more likely to introduce
- errors, effectively causing more packets to be dropped. This
- introduces a conflict with the mechanisms for congestion management
- found in modern versions of TCP [9]. Now, when a packet is dropped,
- the correspondent node's TCP implementation is likely to react as if
- there were a source of network congestion, and initiate the slow-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 73]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- start mechanisms [9] designed for controlling that problem. However,
- those mechanisms are inappropriate for overcoming errors introduced
- by the links themselves, and have the effect of magnifying the
- discontinuity introduced by the dropped packet. This problem has
- been analyzed by Caceres, et al. [3]; there is no easy solution
- available, and certainly no solution likely to be installed soon on
- all correspondent nodes. While this problem is beyond the scope of
- this document, it does illustrate that providing performance
- transparency to mobile nodes involves understanding mechanisms
- outside the network layer. It also indicates the need to avoid
- designs which systematically drop packets; such designs might
- otherwise be considered favorably when making engineering tradeoffs.
-
- D. Example Scenarios
-
- This section shows example Registration Requests for several common
- scenarios.
-
- D.1. Registering with a Foreign Agent Care-of Address
-
- The mobile node receives an Agent Advertisement from a foreign agent
- and wishes to register with that agent using the advertised foreign
- agent care-of address. The mobile node wishes only IP-in-IP
- encapsulation, does not want broadcasts, and does not want
- simultaneous mobility bindings:
-
- IP fields:
- Source Address = mobile node's home address
- Destination Address = copied from the IP source address of the
- Agent Advertisement
- Time to Live = 1
- UDP fields:
- Source Port = <any>
- Destination Port = 434
- Registration Request fields:
- Type = 1
- S=0,B=0,D=0,M=0,G=0
- Lifetime = the Registration Lifetime copied from the
- Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension of the
- Router Advertisement message
- Home Address = the mobile node's home address
- Home Agent = IP address of mobile node's home agent
- Care-of Address = the Care-of Address copied from the
- Mobility Agent Advertisement Extension of the
- Router Advertisement message
- Identification = Network Time Protocol timestamp or Nonce
- Extensions:
- The Mobile-Home Authentication Extension
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 74]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- D.2. Registering with a Co-Located Care-of Address
-
- The mobile node enters a foreign network that contains no foreign
- agents. The mobile node obtains an address from a DHCP server [6]
- for use as a co-located care-of address. The mobile node supports
- all forms of encapsulation (IP-in-IP, minimal encapsulation, and
- GRE), desires a copy of broadcast datagrams on the home network, and
- does not want simultaneous mobility bindings:
-
- IP fields:
- Source Address = care-of address obtained from DHCP server
- Destination Address = IP address of home agent
- Time to Live = 64
- UDP fields:
- Source Port = <any>
- Destination Port = 434
- Registration Request fields:
- Type = 1
- S=0,B=1,D=1,M=1,G=1
- Lifetime = 1800 (seconds)
- Home Address = the mobile node's home address
- Home Agent = IP address of mobile node's home agent
- Care-of Address = care-of address obtained from DHCP server
- Identification = Network Time Protocol timestamp or Nonce
- Extensions:
- The Mobile-Home Authentication Extension
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 75]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- D.3. Deregistration
-
- The mobile node returns home and wishes to deregister all care-of
- addresses with its home agent.
-
- IP fields:
- Source Address = mobile node's home address
- Destination Address = IP address of home agent
- Time to Live = 1
- UDP fields:
- Source Port = <any>
- Destination Port = 434
- Registration Request fields:
- Type = 1
- S=0,B=0,D=0,M=0,G=0
- Lifetime = 0
- Home Address = the mobile node's home address
- Home Agent = IP address of mobile node's home agent
- Care-of Address = the mobile node's home address
- Identification = Network Time Protocol timestamp or Nonce
- Extensions:
- The Mobile-Home Authentication Extension
-
- E. Applicability of Prefix Lengths Extension
-
- Caution is indicated with the use of the Prefix Lengths Extension
- over wireless links, due to the irregular coverage areas provided by
- wireless transmitters. As a result, it is possible that two foreign
- agents advertising the same prefix might indeed provide different
- connectivity to prospective mobile nodes. The Prefix-Lengths
- Extension SHOULD NOT be included in the advertisements sent by agents
- in such a configuration.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 76]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Foreign agents using different wireless interfaces would have to
- cooperate using special protocols to provide identical coverage in
- space, and thus be able to claim to have wireless interfaces situated
- on the same subnetwork. In the case of wired interfaces, a mobile
- node disconnecting and subsequently connecting to a new point of
- attachment, may well send in a new Registration Request no matter
- whether the new advertisement is on the same medium as the last
- recorded advertisement. And, finally, in areas with dense
- populations of foreign agents it would seem unwise to require the
- propagation via routing protocols of the subnet prefixes associated
- with each individual wireless foreign agent; such a strategy could
- lead to quick depletion of available space for routing tables,
- unwarranted increases in the time required for processing routing
- updates, and longer decision times for route selection if routes
- (which are almost always unnecessary) are stored for wireless
- "subnets".
-
- References
-
- [1] Atkinson, R., "IP Authentication Header", RFC 1826, August 1995.
-
- [2] S. M. Bellovin. Security Problems in the TCP/IP Protocol Suite.
- ACM Computer Communications Review, 19(2), March 1989.
-
- [3] Ramon Caceres and Liviu Iftode. Improving the Performance
- of Reliable Transport Protocols in Mobile Computing
- Environments. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications,
- 13(5):850--857, June 1995.
-
- [4] Deering, S., Editor, "ICMP Router Discovery Messages",
- RFC 1256, September 1991.
-
- [5] Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", STD 5,
- RFC 1112, August 1989.
-
- [6] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 1541,
- October 1993.
-
- [7] Eastlake, D., Crocker, S., and J. Schiller, "Randomness
- Requirements for Security", RFC 1750, December 1994.
-
- [8] Hanks, S., Li, R., Farinacci, D., and P. Traina, "Generic
- Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 1701, October 1994.
-
- [9] Van Jacobson. Congestion Avoidance and Control. In Proceedings
- of the SIGCOMM '88 Symposium: Communications Architectures &
- Protocols, pages 314--329, August 1988.
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 77]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- [10] Jacobson, V., "Compressing TCP/IP Headers for Low-Speed Serial
- Links", RFC 1144, February 1990.
-
- [11] McCloghrie, K., and F. Kastenholz, "Evolution of the
- Interfaces Group of MIB-II", RFC 1573, January 1994.
-
- [12] McGregor, G., "The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol
- (IPCP)", RFC 1332, May 1992.
-
- [13] Mills, D., "Network Time Protocol (Version 3):
- Specification, Implementation and Analysis", RFC 1305, March
- 1992.
-
- [14] Perkins, C., "IP Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2003,
- October 1996.
-
- [15] Perkins, C., "Minimal Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2004,
- October 1996.
-
- [16] Plummer, D., "An Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol:
- Or Converting Network Protocol Addresses to 48.bit Ethernet
- Addresses for Transmission on Ethernet Hardware", STD 37,
- RFC 826, November 1982.
-
- [17] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, August
- 1980.
-
- [18] Postel, J., "Multi-LAN Address Resolution", RFC 925, October
- 1984.
-
- [19] Postel, J., Editor, "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791,
- September 1981.
-
- [20] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2,
- RFC 1700, October 1994.
-
- [21] Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321,
- April 1992.
-
- [22] Simpson, W., Editor, "The Point-to-Point Protocol
- (PPP)", STD 51, RFC 1661, July 1994.
-
- [23] W. Richard Stevens. TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume 1: The
- Protocols. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1994.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 78]
-
- RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support October 1996
-
-
- Editor's Address
-
- Questions about this memo can also be directed to the editor:
-
- Charles Perkins
- Room H3-D34
- T. J. Watson Research Center
- IBM Corporation
- 30 Saw Mill River Rd.
- Hawthorne, NY 10532
-
- Work: +1-914-784-7350
- Fax: +1-914-784-6205
- EMail: perk@watson.ibm.com
-
- The working group can be contacted via the current chair:
-
- Jim Solomon
- Motorola, Inc.
- 1301 E. Algonquin Rd.
- Schaumburg, IL 60196
-
- Work: +1-847-576-2753
- EMail: solomon@comm.mot.com
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Perkins Standards Track [Page 79]
-
-