An End-to-End Approach to Host Mobility By, Alex C. Snoeren and Prof. Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory for Computer Science Presented by, Parag Namjoshi.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Internet Indirection Infrastructure (i3 ) Ion Stoica, Daniel Adkins, Shelley Zhuang, Scott Shenker, Sonesh Surana UC Berkeley SIGCOMM 2002 Presented by:
Advertisements

Secure Mobile IP Communication
Mobile IPv6: An Overview Dr Martin Dunmore, Lancaster University.
An End-to-End Approach to Host Mobility Alex C. Snoeren and Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory for Computer Science.
Transitioning to IPv6 April 15,2005 Presented By: Richard Moore PBS Enterprise Technology.
IPv6 Multihoming Support in the Mobile Internet Presented by Paul Swenson CMSC 681, Fall 2007 Article by M. Bagnulo et. al. and published in the October.
Computer Security and Penetration Testing
CCNA – Network Fundamentals
Lecture 9 Page 1 CS 236 Online Denial of Service Attacks that prevent legitimate users from doing their work By flooding the network Or corrupting routing.
UDP & TCP Where would we be without them!. UDP User Datagram Protocol.
1 Mobile IP Myungchul Kim Tel:
IP Spoofing Defense On the State of IP Spoofing Defense TOBY EHRENKRANZ and JUN LI University of Oregon 1 IP Spoofing Defense.
ConnectionMigration 818L Network Centric Computing Spring 2002 Ishan Banerjee.
NISNet Winter School Finse Internet & Web Security Case Study 2: Mobile IPv6 security Dieter Gollmann Hamburg University of Technology
Mobility in the Internet Part II CS 444N, Spring 2002 Instructor: Mary Baker Computer Science Department Stanford University.
CS 268: Project Suggestions Ion Stoica February 6, 2003.
1 Link Layer & Network Layer Some slides are from lectures by Nick Mckeown, Ion Stoica, Frans Kaashoek, Hari Balakrishnan, and Sam Madden Prof. Dina Katabi.
1 CCNA 2 v3.1 Module Intermediate TCP/IP CCNA 2 Module 10.
WXES2106 Network Technology Semester /2005 Chapter 8 Intermediate TCP CCNA2: Module 10.
Internet Indirection Infrastructure (i3) Ion Stoica, Daniel Adkins, Shelley Zhuang, Scott Shenker, Sonesh Surana UC Berkeley SIGCOMM 2002.
Gursharan Singh Tatla Transport Layer 16-May
FIREWALL TECHNOLOGIES Tahani al jehani. Firewall benefits  A firewall functions as a choke point – all traffic in and out must pass through this single.
Mobility (and philosophical questions about names and identity) David Andersen CMU CS
Mobile IP Traversal Of NAT Devices By, Vivek Nemarugommula.
Mobile IP: Introduction Reference: “Mobile networking through Mobile IP”; Perkins, C.E.; IEEE Internet Computing, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, Jan.- Feb. 1998;
Mobile IP Seamless connectivity for mobile computers.
1 Chapter06 Mobile IP. 2 Outline What is the problem at the routing layer when Internet hosts move?! Can the problem be solved? What is the standard solution?
Mobile IP. Outline What is the problem at the routing layer when Internet hosts move?! Can the problem be solved? What is the standard solution? – mobile.
Mobile Networking Prasun Dewan Department of Computer Science University of North Carolina
Dealing with Mobility -- Mobile IP. References r J. Kurose and K. Ross, Computer Networking: A Top-Down Approach Featuring the Internet, 2 nd edition.
Host Mobility for IP Networks CSCI 6704 Group Presentation presented by Ye Liang, ChongZhi Wang, XueHai Wang March 13, 2004.
Sales Kickoff - ARCserve
CIS 725 Wireless networks. Low bandwidth High error rates.
Connection Migration: Why & How Hari Balakrishnan Networks and Mobile Systems Group MIT Lab for Computer Science Joint work with.
Remote Access Chapter 4. Learning Objectives Understand implications of IEEE 802.1x and how it is used Understand VPN technology and its uses for securing.
Session-Based Mobility An End-to-End Approach Alex C. Snoeren MIT Laboratory for Computer Science (with Hari Balakrishnan, Frans Kaashoek, and Jon Salz)
Mobile IP Most of the slides borrowed from Prof. Sridhar Iyer
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Jochen Schiller, SS029.1 Mobile Communications Chapter 9: Mobile Transport Layer  Motivation  TCP-mechanisms.
15-849: Hot Topics in Networking Mobility Srinivasan Seshan.
CHAPTER 10 Session Hijacking. INTRODUCTION The act of taking over a connection of some sort, for examples, network connection, a modem connection or other.
CS332, Ch. 26: TCP Victor Norman Calvin College 1.
FALL 2005CSI 4118 – UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA1 Part 2.5 Internetworking Chapter 25 (Transport Protocols, UDP and TCP, Protocol Port Numbers)
Transport Layer: TCP and UDP. Overview of TCP/IP protocols Comparing TCP and UDP TCP connection: establishment, data transfer, and termination Allocation.
CSE 461 Section. Let’s learn things first! Joke Later!
MOBILE IP GROUP NAME: CLUSTER SEMINAR PRESENTED BY : SEMINAR PRESENTED BY : SANTOSH THOMAS SANTOSH THOMAS STUDENT NO: STUDENT NO:
Reconsidering Internet Mobility Alex C. Snoeren, Hari Balakrishnan, M. Frans Kaashoek MIT Laboratory for Computer Science.
Multimedia & Mobile Communications Lab.
Interfaces and Services Each layer provides a service to the layer above it. A service is a set of primitive operations. Under UNIX, primitives are implemented.
Lesson 7: Network Security and Attacks. Computer Security Operational Model Protection = Prevention+ (Detection + Response) Access Controls Encryption.
Spring 2004 Mobile IP School of Electronics and Information Kyung Hee University Choong Seon HONG
CMSC Presentation An End-to-End Approach to Host Mobility An End-to-End Approach to Host Mobility Alex C. Snoeren and Hari Balakrishnan Alex C. Snoeren.
MIPv6Security: Dimension Of Danger Unauthorized creation (or deletion) of the Binding Cache Entry (BCE).
An Analysis of Using Reflectors for Distributed Denial-of- Service Attacks Paper by Vern Paxson.
UDP & TCP Where would we be without them!. UDP User Datagram Protocol.
Lect 8 Tahani al jehain. Types of attack Remote code execution: occurs when an attacker exploits a software and runs a program that the user does not.
Transport Layer1 TCP Connection Management Recall: TCP sender, receiver establish “connection” before exchanging data segments r initialize TCP variables:
K. Salah1 Security Protocols in the Internet IPSec.
TCP/IP1 Address Resolution Protocol Internet uses IP address to recognize a computer. But IP address needs to be translated to physical address (NIC).
11 CS716 Advanced Computer Networks By Dr. Amir Qayyum.
Mobile IP THE 12 TH MEETING. Mobile IP  Incorporation of mobile users in the network.  Cellular system (e.g., GSM) started with mobility in mind. 
Introduction Wireless devices offering IP connectivity
Networking Applications
Internet Indirection Infrastructure (i3)
Mobile IP.
Outline Basics of network security Definitions Sample attacks
Chris Meullion Preston Burden Dwight Philpotts John C. Jones-Walker
CS 5565 Network Architecture and Protocols
CS 5565 Network Architecture and Protocols
Outline Basics of network security Definitions Sample attacks
TCP Connection Management
Presentation transcript:

An End-to-End Approach to Host Mobility By, Alex C. Snoeren and Prof. Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory for Computer Science Presented by, Parag Namjoshi

A Moving Target Internet hosts are increasingly mobile  Changing physical media or attachment points often requires changing IP address Mobile hosts need to remain locatable  Packets are routed by IP address Preserve transport service model  Connection-oriented protocols provide reliable end-to-end connectivity

Schizophrenic IP addresses. IP addresses can be considered as being semantically equivalent to FQDNs. They are used to keep track of internal state in upper layers. (e.g. TCP, NFS) The Contradiction  On one hand, mobile host needs a stable IP address so that it can be identified (and reached) by other hosts.  On the other hand stable address implies stable routing; thus no mobility.

The competition… Mobility-aware routing (Mobile IP)  Completely transparent to end hosts  Requires a home agent  Often inefficient packet routes Endpoint ID (EID) schemes (Huitema)  Retains standard unicast routes, but…  Yet another level of indirection  Also requires changes to transport layer

Lets talk about the competition… Mobile IP  All traffic to a mobile host may travel via the home agent. The necessity of a home agent can be a significant burden.  Mobile IP requires that the home address continue to be allocated to the mobile host. If the available address space is small, such a restriction may make re-addressing prohibitive.  Ingress filtering may cause “reverse tunneling”.

The Migrate Approach Locate hosts through existing DNS  Secure, dynamic DNS is currently deployed and widely available (RFC 2137)  Maintains standard IP addressing model IP address are topological addresses, not Ids Fundamental to Internet scaling properties Ensure seamless connectivity through connection migration  Notify only the current set of correspondent hosts  Follows from the end-to-end argument

Migrate Architecture DNS Server Mobile Host foo.bar.edu Location Query (DNS Lookup) Connection Initiation Location Update (Dynamic DNS Update) Connection Migration xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy Correspondent Host

Migration Approach Join together two separate connections  By unifying the context space  Reference previous connection with token  Requires minimal transport state machine changes Preserve semantics, both internal and external to the connection  Implicit address assignment  Works with NATs, PEPs, all middle boxes

TCP connection migration Provide special Migrate option  Sent on SYN packets of new connection  Indicates new connection should be joined to a previous one Use previous sequence space  Works with SACK, FACK, Snoop… Preserve three-way SYN handshake  Works with statefull firewalls

TCP Connection Migration 1.Initial SYN 2.SYN/ACK 3.ACK (with data) 4.Normal data transfer 5.Migrate SYN 6.Migrate SYN/ACK 7.ACK (with data)

TCP Connection Migration 1.Initial SYN 2.SYN/ACK 3.ACK (with data) 4.Normal data transfer 5.Migrate SYN 6.Migrate SYN/ACK 7.ACK (with data)

TCP Connection Migration 1.Initial SYN 2.SYN/ACK 3.ACK (with data) 4.Normal data transfer 5.Migrate SYN 6.Migrate SYN/ACK 7.ACK (with data)

TCP State Machine Changes MIGRATE_WAIT 2MSL timeout recv: SYN (migrate T, R) send: SYN, ACK recv: RST appl: migrate send: SYN (migrate T, R) recv: SYN (migrate T, R) send: SYN, ACK 2 new transitions between existing states - and - 1 new state handles pathological race condition

Experimental Topology Fixed Basestation Fixed Server 100Mbps Ethernet Mobile Location Kbps Modem Mobile Location Kbps Modem …then moves to a new location Mobile client initiates a transfer…

Migration Trace SYN/ACK Buffered Packets (old address) Migrate SYN

A Lossy Trace with SACK SYN/ACK Migrate SYN Buffered Packets (old address) ACK w/SACK

Securing the Migration Problem: Increased vulnerability to hijacking  Ingress filtering doesn’t help  Attacker only needs token and sequence space Solution: Keep the token secret  Negotiate it using Diffie-Hellman exchange  Use sequence numbers to prevent replay Resulting connections are as secure as standard TCP (not very)  Use IPsec or SSH for real security

Preventing DoS Attacks Migrate SYNs are heavyweight  Require real computation (SHA-1 hash)  Thus Migrate SYN floods are more dangerous than standard SYN floods A pre-computable token guards against frivolous computation  Refreshing tokens after each successful migration makes replay window very small

Performance Implications Migration takes a round-trip time  No dependence on previous location or “home” location Congestion state is tricky  In general, restart from scratch (slow-start)  However, if paths are similar, could trigger fast retransmit (Cáceres & Iftode ’95)  Congestion state may be available elsewhere (Balakrishnan et al. ’99)

Limitations End hosts can’t move “simultaneously”  Relatively rare in non ad-hoc environments DNS caching  Today’s load-balancing techniques are pushing clients to be more agile Smooth handoffs not possible.

Benefits Exposes address changes to end hosts  Agile applications can adapt to changing conditions for better performance (Invoke end-to- end argument.)  Mobility per connection, not just per host Preserves IP addressing semantics  No changes to the routing infrastructure  No additional entities like home agent & foreign agent come into picture. (Invoke Occam’s razor.) Minimal penalty for mobility support  Obtain optimal unicast packet routing

Conclusion. The architecture is compatible with the current routing infrastructure. Does not add additional levels of indirection. Does not change TCP headers, instead using a new TCP option. End hosts are notified of the mobility, upper layers can use this knowledge. May even be deployed.May even be deployed.

Any questions ?

Migrate Options Kind Token Token (cont) Request Request (cont) LenReqNo ECDH Key Material (cont) KindLenCurveECDH ECDH Key Material (cont) Migrate-PermittedMigrate 8 bit curve domain specifier 136 (+64) bits of key material Request Number 64 bit pre-computed token SHA-1(N i,N j,Key) 64 bit signed request SHA-1(N i,N j,Key,S,ReqNo)

A Note on Key Strength 200 bits of Elliptic Curve Crypto is a lot  Cracking a 193 bit ECC key would take 8.52*10 14 MIPS years [Lenstra ’99]  Or 1.89*10 12 years on an Intel 450Mhz PII TCP hijacking with IP spoofing is easier TCP alone is inherently insecure  Real security requires end host authentication and strong session keys