doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 1 Network Selection Bernard Aboba Microsoft

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 2 Outline Problem Definition Open Issues Next Steps

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 3 Challenges for Public Access WLAN Minimizing channel conflicts –In some locations (e.g. airports) multiple networks are becoming the norm. Airlines are installing networks for use in baggage reconciliation and roving ticket counters Multiple wireless ISPs often also want to serve airport customers –Radio interference is an issue In the US and Europe b networks can support only 3 non-overlapping channels In France and Japan only one channel is available Once the channels are utilized by existing APs, additional APs will interfere and reduce performance Minimizing capital expenditures –In this economic environment, raising capital is difficult –Undesirable to build out multiple networks in the same location - why not build one network and share it? Attaining high utilization of deployed Access Points –Profitability enhanced by filling in periods of low usage on the “diurnal curve” –Implies a need to serve many different types of customers: business, consumers, etc. Minimizing support costs –Desirable to support a wide variety of clients without having to preconfigure them

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 4 Wouldn’t It Be Great If… A single network could be shared by multiple providers? Each provider could retain the flexibility to announce their own network, and select the services they wish to provide (rates, security mechanisms, etc.)? Each provider could manage their own users without interfering with other providers? Customers could discover any of the offered networks without needing to pre-configure their stations? To get there, we need to solve the Network Selection Problem!

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 5 Aspects of Network Selection 1.Access Network Discovery –Which access point to attach to? 2.Identifier Selection –Which identity and credentials to use in this AP? 3.Selection of roaming intermediaries –How to route the AAA conversation to the home network? 4.Payload Routing –How to route payload traffic in the right way –Filters and mandatory tunnels

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 6 An alternative decomposition Discovery –Access networks and access points –Home networks available through these –Mediating networks Decision –Manual or automatic –Automatic is preferred Most likely needs some pre-provisioned preference information Indicating the selected network –Attach to the chosen network and access point –Provide the chosen identity and home domain –Possibly provide some hints about mediating networks

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 7 When is Network Selection an Issue? More than one network is available, each with different characteristics. The user has multiple credentials, and needs to decide which to use to authenticate to a particular network. There is more than one roaming path between the access and home network, and service parameters or pricing differs between them. The roaming relationships between access and home networks are so complicated that current AAA protocols cannot route the requests to the home network based solely on the Network Access Identifier (NAI). Payload packets get routed or tunneled differently, based on the roaming relationship path. This may have an impact on the available services or their pricing. Providers share the same infrastructure, such as wireless access points.

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 8 Some Thoughts… All four problems are relevant. Potential need for new solutions, at least for the three first problems. The problems are very hard if you consider them with large number of networks, fast handoffs, security, and automatic decisions. The proliferation of multiple network selection technologies within IEEE 802, IETF, and 3GPP would be bad. Solving all problems with current link layers and existing network access devices may not be possible. Phasing?

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 9 Feedback from 3GPP SA2 WLAN group What parts of the problem does 3GPP want to solve? –Problem 1 (Access Network Discovery) and 3 (AAA routing) are relevant to 3GPP. –Problem 2 (Identifier Selection) is considered at this stage out of scope. –Problem 4 (Payload Routing) is considered a separate problem within SA2 scope and is still under discussion. Observations [J. Arkko] –3GPP uses existing L2 mechanisms for problem 1, expects an IETF solution for problem 3 –Needed for 3GPP Release 6

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 10 Recommendations from IETF 59 There is current interest in problem 1 (access network selection) –Problem 1 belongs to layer 2 –Long-term, discovery is most efficient at layer 2 There is current interest in problem 3 (roaming intermediary selection) –Problem 3 needs at least partial IETF work, though intermediary discovery could also be done at layer 2 –Any IETF intermediary discovery solution would necessarily be short-term Other problems are lower priority…

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 11 IETF Work In Network Selection 1.Access Network Discovery –No chartered work yet 2.Identifier Selection –draft-ietf-pkix-wlan-extns-05.txt –Product of the PKIX WG 3.Selection of roaming intermediaries –draft-arkko-roamops-rfc2486bis-00.txt –Included in RADEXT WG Charter 4.Payload Routing –Improvements to AAA filtering and redirection capabilities, proposed in RADEXT WG Charter

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 12 Thinking About the Access Netowrk Discovery Problem Why are existing solutions not adequate? –WFA: Public Access MRD Why are recently proposed standards not adequate? –IEEE 802.1ab, IEEE 802.1af –Answer: unlikely to be implemented by APs

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 13 What is a Virtual Access Point? A “Virtual Access Point” is a logical entity that exists within a physical Access Point (AP). Each Virtual AP appears to stations (STAs) to be an independent physical AP. –Virtual APs emulate the operation of physical APs at the MAC layer. –Virtual APs provide partial emulation of the IP and Application Layer behavior of physical APs. –Emulating the operation of a physical AP at the radio frequency layer is typically not possible unless multiple radios are available.

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 14 Is It “Virtual” Or Is It Real? Only Your Radio Knows For Sure! Channel 6 AP AAP BSTA SSID: Foo BSSID: A Rates: 5.5,11 Security: WPA SSID: Bar BSSID: B Rates: 1,2,5.5,11 Security: Open Physical APs AP A Channel 6 Virtual APs SSID: Foo BSSID: A Rates: 5.5,11 Security: WPA SSID: Bar BSSID: B Rates: 1,2,5.5,11 Security: Open Beacon/Probe Response

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 15 What Is Required for a Virtual AP? Multiple SSIDs. –Support for multiple SSID advertisement by APs –Support for STA discovery for advertised SSIDs. Multiple capability advertisements. –Each Virtual AP can advertise its own set of capabilities. Pre-authentication routing. –Determination of the target SSID prior to Association (for routing of pre-authentication traffic). Multiple VLANs. –Allow a unique VLAN (and unique default key) to be assigned to each Virtual AP. Multiple RADIUS configurations. –Multiple RADIUS configurations, one for each virtual AP. Multiple virtual SNMP MIBs. –A virtual MIB instance per Virtual AP.

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 16 The State of “Virtual APs” Today IEEE does not provide guidance on required MAC-layer behavior of “Virtual APs” –Multiple approaches taken by AP vendors –Different assumptions made by NIC vendors –Interoperability, reliability problems abound Solution: WFA addressing the issue in the Public Access Group –MRD near completion; requires separate BSSID for each advertised configuration –Test plan to come

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 17 How Well do Virtual APs Scale? Velayos & Karlsson “Techniques to Reduce IEEE b Handover Time”, Swedish Royal Institute of Technology – 02%20Handover%20in%20IEEE%20802.pdfhttp:// 02%20Handover%20in%20IEEE%20802.pdf

doc.: IEEE /0638r0 Submission May 2004 Bernard Aboba, MicrosoftSlide 18 Feedback?