1. Hannes Tschofenig Henning Schulzrinne
NSIS Mobility Issues
Hannes Tschofenig
Henning Schulzrinne

2. Possible requirements
Local signaling only: If a local route change happens then the signaling message exchange should be kept local.
No strong-coupling: No strong-coupling with a macro/micro-mobility protocol (I.e. in-band signaling = adding QoS signaling information to a mobility protocol)
Flow identifier change: Flow identifier adaptations along the path should be possible
Double reservations: Double reservations should be avoided
[ Interworking with existing micro-mobility protocols and Seamoby context transfer]

3. Flow Identifier Handling
A flow identifier might change along the path because of the following reasons:
Changing Care-of address
Hierarchical mobility schemes
Tunneling
IPSec
NAT
IPv4 to IPv6 transition
Problematic: Inappropriately selected flow identifier might require end-to-end signaling
Bad: Ineffective QoS reservation (e.g. due to NAT or tunnels)

4. Mobility – Uplink Reservation
oCoA
AR(old)
Crossover
Router
NSIS Create CN
AR(new)
nCoA
Data
ICM N templ-example.ppt

5. Mobility – Uplink Reservation
NSIS Delete
oCoA
AR(old)
Movement
Crossover
Router CN
AR(new)
nCoA
Data
ICM N templ-example.ppt

6. Mobility – Uplink Reservation
AR(old)
Crossover
Router
NSIS Response CN
Also possible:
Query along the new paths (cost and resource availability)
AR(new)
nCoA
Data
ICM N templ-example.ppt

7. Mobility – Downlink Reservation
AR(old)
Movement
MAP CN
Registration Request Binding Update
NSIS Signaling
AR(new)
Protocol interaction is similar to a regular route change.
Interactions with micro-mobility software (at MAP) can lead to performance improvements
Data