1. NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25 77th IETF, Anaheimdraft-bernardos-netext-ll-statement-01 Applicability Statement on Link Layer implementation/Logical Interface over Multiple Physical Interfaces draft-bernardos-netext-ll-statement-01 Carlos J. Bernardos – Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Antonio de la Oliva – Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Juan Carlos Zuniga – InterDigital Communications, LLC Telemaco Melia – Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs Anaheim, NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25

2. NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25 NETEXT charter Goals and Milestones Jul 2010: Initial WG document on Applicability Statement on Logical Interface over Multiple Physical Interfaces Dec 2010: Submit Applicability Statement on Logical Interface over Multiple Physical Interfaces to IESG for publication as Informational RFC 77th IETF, Anaheimdraft-bernardos-netext-ll-statement-01

3. NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25 NETEXT charter Hiding access technology changes from host IP layer: Proxy mobility is based on the assumption that changes in host IP stacks are undesirable. However, link layer implementations can hide the actually used physical interfaces from the IP stack. For instance, a "logical interface" at the IP layer may enable packet transmission and reception over different physical media. Such techniques can be used to achieve inter-access handovers or flow mobility, i.e., the movement of selected flows from one access technology to another. It is assumed that an IP layer interface can simultaneously and/or sequentially attach to multiple MAGs (possibly over multiple media). The hiding mechanisms also need to work together with existing RFC 5213 handover hint mechanisms. The specification of any actual link layer mechanisms is outside the scope of the working group, but the group works on the following: - Informational applicability statement that analyzes the issues involved with this approach and characterizes the contexts in which such use is or is not appropriate. 77th IETF, Anaheimdraft-bernardos-netext-ll-statement-01

4. NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25 Hiding access technology changes There are several techniques/ mechanisms that allow hiding technology changes or movement from host IP layer The draft analyses existing approaches and provides an applicability statement for each one of them The Logical Interface provides the most suitable framework for flow mobility and inter-tech handover 77th IETF, Anaheimdraft-bernardos-netext-ll-statement-01

5. NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25 Logical Interface It is a construct that “hides” underlying physical IF(s) Requirements for a Logical Interface – Accept packets on any physical IF as long as the prefix is valid (DL) – Transmit uplink packets on the same physical IF on which the downlink packet was received for the particular prefix/flow A logical IF can be realized by implementation specific mechanisms – e.g. virtual interface (bonding/bridging module in Linux) Enabler for flow mobility and inter-access HO 77th IETF, Anaheimdraft-bernardos-netext-ll-statement-01

6. NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25 Logical Interface APP 1 APP 2 APP 3 TCP/IP WiFi 3GPP Prefix1Prefix2 Prefix1 Prefix2 SRC: IP@CN, DST: Prefix1-flow Logical Interface APP 1 APP 2 APP 3 TCP/IP WiFi 3GPP Prefix1Prefix2 Prefix1 Prefix2 SRC: Prefix1-flow, DST: IP@CN DL case UL case MN

7. NETEXT WG, 2010-03-25 Next steps Adoption of this draft as Working Group document 77th IETF, Anaheimdraft-bernardos-netext-ll-statement-01