Raj, Although many of the proposed solutions are based on Mobile IPv6, I think it is not the intension in the requirement REQ-1 to imply which functions are to be defined or distributed. If it sounds so, we should reword it.
H Anthony Chan From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 1:02 PM To: h chan; [email protected] Subject: Re: [DMM] draft requirement REQ-1: Distributed deployment Hi Anthony, When you refer to " the functions of mobility management " do you implicitly assume that to be the Home Agent? Or is there an assumption that there could be new elements as well to enable such distributed mobility? One of the underlying aspects of DMM (AFAICT) is to use Mobile IPv6. And hence the question above. -Raj From: ext chan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, May 7, 2012 12:55 PM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [DMM] draft requirement REQ-1: Distributed deployment REQ-1: Distributed deployment IP mobility, network access and routing solutions provided by DMM SHALL enable the functions of mobility management of IP sessions to be distributed so that the traffic is routed in an optimal manner without relying on centrally deployed anchors. REQ-1M (Motivation for REQ-1) The goals of this requirement are to match mobility deployment with current trend in network evolution: more cost and resource effective to cache and distribute contents when combining distributed anchors with caching systems (e.g., CDN); improve scalability; reduce signaling overhead; avoid single point of failure; mitigate threats being focused on a centrally deployed anchor, e.g., home agent and local mobility anchor. RELEVANT problems: PS1: Non-optimal routes Routing via a centralized anchor often results in a longer route, and the problem is especially manifested when accessing a local or cache server of a Content Delivery Network (CDN). PS2: Non-optimality in Evolved Network Architecture The centralized mobility management can become non-optimal as Network architecture evolves and become more flattened. PS3: Low scalability of centralized route and mobility context maintenance Setting up such special routes and maintaining the mobility context for each MN is more difficult to scale in a centralized design with a large number of MNs. Distributing the route maintenance function and the mobility context maintenance function among different networks can be more scalable. PS4: Single point of failure and attack Centralized anchoring may be more vulnerable to single point of failure and attack than a distributed system. (The above is drafted with contributions, inputs and discussions from various people. Additional contributions and comments are most welcome.) H Anthony Chan
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
