An End-to-End Approach to Host Mobility Alex C. Snoeren and Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory for Computer Science.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Security Issues In Mobile IP
Advertisements

1 Improving TCP/IP Performance Over Wireless Networks Authors: Hari Balakrishnan, Srinivasan Seshan, Elan Amir and Randy H. Katz Presented by Sampoorani.
Internet Indirection Infrastructure (i3 ) Ion Stoica, Daniel Adkins, Shelley Zhuang, Scott Shenker, Sonesh Surana UC Berkeley SIGCOMM 2002 Presented by:
Secure Mobile IP Communication
1 Improving TCP Performance over Mobile Networks HALA ELAARAG Stetson University Speaker : Aron ACM Computing Surveys 2002.
Umut Girit  One of the core members of the Internet Protocol Suite, the set of network protocols used for the Internet. With UDP, computer.
Mobility Jennifer Rexford COS 461: Computer Networks Lectures: MW 10-10:50am in Architecture N101
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
BZUPAGES.COM 1 User Datagram Protocol - UDP RFC 768, Protocol 17 Provides unreliable, connectionless on top of IP Minimal overhead, high performance –No.
1 Mobile IP Myungchul Kim Tel:
Improving TCP/IP Performance Over Wireless Networks Authors: Hari Balakrishnan, Srinivasan Seshan, Elan Amir and Randy H. Katz Jerome Mitchell Resilient.
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
Internet Indirection Infrastructure Ion Stoica and many others… UC Berkeley.
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 CCNA 2 v3.1 Module Intermediate TCP/IP CCNA 2 Module 10.
COS 461: Computer Networks
TCP: Software for Reliable Communication. Spring 2002Computer Networks Applications Internet: a Collection of Disparate Networks Different goals: Speed,
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
Towards a New Naming Architectures
Firewalls CS432. Overview  What are firewalls?  Types of firewalls Packet filtering firewalls Packet filtering firewalls Sateful firewalls Sateful firewalls.
1 Chapter Internetworking Part 4 (Transport Protocols, UDP and TCP, Protocol Port Numbers)
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 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)
15-849: Hot Topics in Networking Mobility Srinivasan Seshan.
FALL 2005CSI 4118 – UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA1 Part 2.5 Internetworking Chapter 25 (Transport Protocols, UDP and TCP, Protocol Port Numbers)
TCP1 Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). TCP2 Outline Transmission Control Protocol.
Reconsidering Internet Mobility Alex C. Snoeren, Hari Balakrishnan, M. Frans Kaashoek MIT Laboratory for Computer Science.
Multimedia & Mobile Communications Lab.
Information-Centric Networks06c-1 Week 6 / Paper 3 Middleboxes No Longer Considered Harmful –Michael Walfish, Jeremy Stribling, Maxwell Krohn, Hari Balakrishnan,
Fine-Grained Failover Using Connection Migration Alex C. Snoeren, David G. Andersen, Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory for Computer Science.
Computer Science and Engineering Computer System Security CSE 5339/7339 Session 25 November 16, 2004.
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).
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.
© 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved..
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.
TCP/IP1 Address Resolution Protocol Internet uses IP address to recognize a computer. But IP address needs to be translated to physical address (NIC).
The Transport Layer Implementation Services Functions Protocols
Introduction Wireless devices offering IP connectivity
General Classes of TCP/IP Problems
Networking Applications
Internet Indirection Infrastructure (i3)
Mobile IP.
Distributed Systems.
SECURING NETWORK TRAFFIC WITH IPSEC
Chris Meullion Preston Burden Dwight Philpotts John C. Jones-Walker
SCTP v/s TCP – A Comparison of Transport Protocols for Web Traffic
CS 5565 Network Architecture and Protocols
Transport Layer Unit 5.
The IP, TCP, UDP protocols
CS 5565 Network Architecture and Protocols
The Transport Layer Chapter 6.
TCP Connection Management
Presentation transcript:

An End-to-End Approach to Host Mobility Alex C. Snoeren and Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory for Computer Science

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

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

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

Previous Migration Schemes Multi-homed schemes  Require new transport protocols (SCTP)  Often require a priori knowledge of possible set of IP addresses Connection-ID schemes  May not preserve transport semantics  May require a per-packet overhead  Many security and DoS issues

Our 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

An Application: TCP 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) (Note typo in proceedings)

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

Benefits & Limitations Exposes address changes to end hosts  Agile applications can adapt to changing conditions for better performance  Mobility per connection, not just per host Preserves IP addressing semantics  No changes to the routing infrastructure Minimal penalty for mobility support  Obtain optimal unicast packet routing End hosts can’t move “simultaneously”  Relatively rare in non ad-hoc environments

Software now available on the web: Networks and Mobile Systems

Implementation Details Patched Linux kernel to support TCP connection migration  Processes can migrate open connections using ioctl() system calls  Daemon/users can migrate existing connections through the /proc file system Bind 8 provides dynamic updates  User-land DNS update script

Continuing Research Host mobility  End-to-End support for disconnectivity Connection migration  Other transport protocols (RTP)  Load balancing/fast fail-over techniques

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

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