diff options
| author | Thomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> | 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Thomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> | 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100 |
| commit | 4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 (patch) | |
| tree | e3989f47a7994642eb325063d46e8f08ffa681dc /doc/rfc/rfc3775.txt | |
| parent | ea76e11061bda059ae9f9ad130a9895cc85607db (diff) | |
doc: Add RFC documents
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3775.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc3775.txt | 9243 |
1 files changed, 9243 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3775.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3775.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..cd207f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3775.txt @@ -0,0 +1,9243 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group D. Johnson +Request for Comments: 3775 Rice University +Category: Standards Track C. Perkins + Nokia Research Center + J. Arkko + Ericsson + June 2004 + + + Mobility Support in IPv6 + +Status of this Memo + + This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the + Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for + improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet + Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state + and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). + +Abstract + + This document specifies a protocol which allows nodes to remain + reachable while moving around in the IPv6 Internet. Each mobile node + is always identified by its home address, regardless of its current + point of attachment to the Internet. While situated away from its + home, a mobile node is also associated with a care-of address, which + provides information about the mobile node's current location. IPv6 + packets addressed to a mobile node's home address are transparently + routed to its care-of address. The protocol enables IPv6 nodes to + cache the binding of a mobile node's home address with its care-of + address, and to then send any packets destined for the mobile node + directly to it at this care-of address. To support this operation, + Mobile IPv6 defines a new IPv6 protocol and a new destination option. + All IPv6 nodes, whether mobile or stationary, can communicate with + mobile nodes. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 1] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 2. Comparison with Mobile IP for IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3. Terminology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 3.1. General Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.2. Mobile IPv6 Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 4. Overview of Mobile IPv6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 4.1. Basic Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 4.2. New IPv6 Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 4.3. New IPv6 Destination Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 4.4. New IPv6 ICMP Messages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 4.5. Conceptual Data Structure Terminology . . . . . . . 17 + 4.6. Site-Local Addressability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5. Overview of Mobile IPv6 Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.1. Binding Updates to Home Agents. . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 5.2. Binding Updates to Correspondent Nodes. . . . . . . 20 + 5.2.1. Node Keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 5.2.2. Nonces. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 5.2.3. Cookies and Tokens. . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 5.2.4. Cryptographic Functions . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 5.2.5. Return Routability Procedure. . . . . . . . 22 + 5.2.6. Authorizing Binding Management Messages . . 27 + 5.2.7. Updating Node Keys and Nonces . . . . . . . 29 + 5.2.8. Preventing Replay Attacks . . . . . . . . . 30 + 5.3. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery. . . . . . . . 30 + 5.4. Mobile Prefix Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 + 5.5. Payload Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 + 6. New IPv6 Protocol, Message Types, and Destination Option . 31 + 6.1. Mobility Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 + 6.1.1. Format. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 6.1.2. Binding Refresh Request Message . . . . . . 34 + 6.1.3. Home Test Init Message. . . . . . . . . . . 35 + 6.1.4. Care-of Test Init Message . . . . . . . . . 36 + 6.1.5. Home Test Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 + 6.1.6. Care-of Test Message. . . . . . . . . . . . 38 + 6.1.7. Binding Update Message. . . . . . . . . . . 39 + 6.1.8. Binding Acknowledgement Message . . . . . . 42 + 6.1.9. Binding Error Message . . . . . . . . . . . 44 + 6.2. Mobility Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 + 6.2.1. Format. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 + 6.2.2. Pad1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 + 6.2.3. PadN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 + 6.2.4. Binding Refresh Advice. . . . . . . . . . . 48 + 6.2.5. Alternate Care-of Address . . . . . . . . . 49 + 6.2.6. Nonce Indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 + 6.2.7. Binding Authorization Data. . . . . . . . . 50 + 6.3. Home Address Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 2] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 6.4. Type 2 Routing Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 + 6.4.1. Format. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 + 6.5. ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Request Message . 55 + 6.6. ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Reply Message . . 56 + 6.7. ICMP Mobile Prefix Solicitation Message Format. . . 57 + 6.8. ICMP Mobile Prefix Advertisement Message Format . . 59 + 7. Modifications to IPv6 Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . 61 + 7.1. Modified Router Advertisement Message Format. . . . 61 + 7.2. Modified Prefix Information Option Format . . . . . 62 + 7.3. New Advertisement Interval Option Format. . . . . . 64 + 7.4. New Home Agent Information Option Format. . . . . . 65 + 7.5. Changes to Sending Router Advertisements. . . . . . 67 + 8. Requirements for Types of IPv6 Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . 69 + 8.1. All IPv6 Nodes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 + 8.2. IPv6 Nodes with Support for Route Optimization. . . 69 + 8.3. All IPv6 Routers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 + 8.4. IPv6 Home Agents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 + 8.5. IPv6 Mobile Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 + 9. Correspondent Node Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 + 9.1. Conceptual Data Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 + 9.2. Processing Mobility Headers . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 + 9.3. Packet Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 + 9.3.1. Receiving Packets with Home Address Option. 76 + 9.3.2. Sending Packets to a Mobile Node. . . . . . 77 + 9.3.3. Sending Binding Error Messages. . . . . . . 78 + 9.3.4. Receiving ICMP Error Messages . . . . . . . 79 + 9.4. Return Routability Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . 79 + 9.4.1. Receiving Home Test Init Messages . . . . . 80 + 9.4.2. Receiving Care-of Test Init Messages. . . . 80 + 9.4.3. Sending Home Test Messages. . . . . . . . . 80 + 9.4.4. Sending Care-of Test Messages . . . . . . . 81 + 9.5 Processing Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 + 9.5.1. Receiving Binding Updates . . . . . . . . . 81 + 9.5.2. Requests to Cache a Binding . . . . . . . . 84 + 9.5.3. Requests to Delete a Binding. . . . . . . . 84 + 9.5.4. Sending Binding Acknowledgements. . . . . . 85 + 9.5.5. Sending Binding Refresh Requests. . . . . . 86 + 9.6. Cache Replacement Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 + 10. Home Agent Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 + 10.1. Conceptual Data Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 + 10.2. Processing Mobility Headers . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 + 10.3. Processing Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 + 10.3.1. Primary Care-of Address Registration. . . . 88 + 10.3.2. Primary Care-of Address De-Registration . . 92 + 10.4. Packet Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 + 10.4.1. Intercepting Packets for a Mobile Node. . . 94 + 10.4.2. Processing Intercepted Packets. . . . . . . 95 + 10.4.3. Multicast Membership Control. . . . . . . . 96 + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 3] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 10.4.4. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration. . . . . 98 + 10.4.5. Handling Reverse Tunneled Packets . . . . . 98 + 10.4.6. Protecting Return Routability Packets . . . 99 + 10.5. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery. . . . . . . . 99 + 10.5.1. Receiving Router Advertisement Messages . . 100 + 10.6. Sending Prefix Information to the Mobile Node . . . 102 + 10.6.1. List of Home Network Prefixes . . . . . . . 102 + 10.6.2. Scheduling Prefix Deliveries. . . . . . . . 102 + 10.6.3. Sending Advertisements. . . . . . . . . . . 104 + 10.6.4. Lifetimes for Changed Prefixes. . . . . . . 105 + 11. Mobile Node Operation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 + 11.1. Conceptual Data Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 + 11.2. Processing Mobility Headers . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 + 11.3. Packet Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 + 11.3.1. Sending Packets While Away from Home. . . . 107 + 11.3.2. Interaction with Outbound IPsec Processing. 110 + 11.3.3. Receiving Packets While Away from Home. . . 112 + 11.3.4. Routing Multicast Packets . . . . . . . . . 114 + 11.3.5. Receiving ICMP Error Messages . . . . . . . 115 + 11.3.6. Receiving Binding Error Messages. . . . . . 116 + 11.4. Home Agent and Prefix Management. . . . . . . . . . 117 + 11.4.1. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery. . . . 117 + 11.4.2. Sending Mobile Prefix Solicitations . . . . 118 + 11.4.3. Receiving Mobile Prefix Advertisements. . . 118 + 11.5. Movement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 + 11.5.1. Movement Detection. . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 + 11.5.2. Forming New Care-of Addresses . . . . . . . 122 + 11.5.3. Using Multiple Care-of Addresses. . . . . . 123 + 11.5.4. Returning Home. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 + 11.6. Return Routability Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . 126 + 11.6.1. Sending Test Init Messages. . . . . . . . . 126 + 11.6.2. Receiving Test Messages . . . . . . . . . . 127 + 11.6.3. Protecting Return Routability Packets . . . 128 + 11.7. Processing Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 + 11.7.1. Sending Binding Updates to the Home Agent . 128 + 11.7.2. Correspondent Registration. . . . . . . . . 131 + 11.7.3. Receiving Binding Acknowledgements. . . . . 134 + 11.7.4. Receiving Binding Refresh Requests. . . . . 136 + 11.8. Retransmissions and Rate Limiting . . . . . . . . . 137 + 12. Protocol Constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 + 13. Protocol Configuration Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 + 14. IANA Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 + 15. Security Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 + 15.1. Threats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 + 15.2. Features. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 + 15.3. Binding Updates to Home Agent . . . . . . . . . . . 145 + 15.4. Binding Updates to Correspondent Nodes. . . . . . . 148 + 15.4.1. Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 4] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 15.4.2. Achieved Security Properties. . . . . . . . 149 + 15.4.3. Comparison to Regular IPv6 Communications . 150 + 15.4.4. Replay Attacks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 + 15.4.5. Denial-of-Service Attacks . . . . . . . . . 152 + 15.4.6. Key Lengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 + 15.5. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery. . . . . . . . 154 + 15.6. Mobile Prefix Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 + 15.7. Tunneling via the Home Agent. . . . . . . . . . . . 155 + 15.8. Home Address Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 + 15.9. Type 2 Routing Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 + 16. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 + 17. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 + 18. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 + 18.1. Normative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 + 18.2. Informative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 + Appendix A. Future Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 + A.1. Piggybacking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 + A.2. Triangular Routing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 + A.3. New Authorization Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 + A.4. Dynamically Generated Home Addresses. . . . . . . . 161 + A.5. Remote Home Address Configuration . . . . . . . . . 162 + A.6. Neighbor Discovery Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . 163 + Authors' Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 + Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 + +1. Introduction + + This document specifies a protocol which allows nodes to remain + reachable while moving around in the IPv6 Internet. Without specific + support for mobility in IPv6 [11], packets destined to a mobile node + would not be able to reach it while the mobile node is away from its + home link. In order to continue communication in spite of its + movement, a mobile node could change its IP address each time it + moves to a new link, but the mobile node would then not be able to + maintain transport and higher-layer connections when it changes + location. Mobility support in IPv6 is particularly important, as + mobile computers are likely to account for a majority or at least a + substantial fraction of the population of the Internet during the + lifetime of IPv6. + + The protocol defined in this document, known as Mobile IPv6, allows a + mobile node to move from one link to another without changing the + mobile node's "home address". Packets may be routed to the mobile + node using this address regardless of the mobile node's current point + of attachment to the Internet. The mobile node may also continue to + communicate with other nodes (stationary or mobile) after moving to a + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 5] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + new link. The movement of a mobile node away from its home link is + thus transparent to transport and higher-layer protocols and + applications. + + The Mobile IPv6 protocol is just as suitable for mobility across + homogeneous media as for mobility across heterogeneous media. For + example, Mobile IPv6 facilitates node movement from one Ethernet + segment to another as well as it facilitates node movement from an + Ethernet segment to a wireless LAN cell, with the mobile node's IP + address remaining unchanged in spite of such movement. + + One can think of the Mobile IPv6 protocol as solving the network- + layer mobility management problem. Some mobility management + applications -- for example, handover among wireless transceivers, + each of which covers only a very small geographic area -- have been + solved using link-layer techniques. For example, in many current + wireless LAN products, link-layer mobility mechanisms allow a + "handover" of a mobile node from one cell to another, re-establishing + link-layer connectivity to the node in each new location. + + Mobile IPv6 does not attempt to solve all general problems related to + the use of mobile computers or wireless networks. In particular, + this protocol does not attempt to solve: + + o Handling links with unidirectional connectivity or partial + reachability, such as the hidden terminal problem where a host is + hidden from only some of the routers on the link. + + o Access control on a link being visited by a mobile node. + + o Local or hierarchical forms of mobility management (similar to + many current link-layer mobility management solutions). + + o Assistance for adaptive applications. + + o Mobile routers. + + o Service Discovery. + + o Distinguishing between packets lost due to bit errors vs. network + congestion. + +2. Comparison with Mobile IP for IPv4 + + The design of Mobile IP support in IPv6 (Mobile IPv6) benefits both + from the experiences gained from the development of Mobile IP support + in IPv4 (Mobile IPv4) [22, 23, 24], and from the opportunities + provided by IPv6. Mobile IPv6 thus shares many features with Mobile + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 6] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + IPv4, but is integrated into IPv6 and offers many other improvements. + This section summarizes the major differences between Mobile IPv4 and + Mobile IPv6: + + o There is no need to deploy special routers as "foreign agents", as + in Mobile IPv4. Mobile IPv6 operates in any location without any + special support required from the local router. + + o Support for route optimization is a fundamental part of the + protocol, rather than a nonstandard set of extensions. + + o Mobile IPv6 route optimization can operate securely even without + pre-arranged security associations. It is expected that route + optimization can be deployed on a global scale between all mobile + nodes and correspondent nodes. + + o Support is also integrated into Mobile IPv6 for allowing route + optimization to coexist efficiently with routers that perform + "ingress filtering" [26]. + + o The IPv6 Neighbor Unreachability Detection assures symmetric + reachability between the mobile node and its default router in the + current location. + + o Most packets sent to a mobile node while away from home in Mobile + IPv6 are sent using an IPv6 routing header rather than IP + encapsulation, reducing the amount of resulting overhead compared + to Mobile IPv4. + + o Mobile IPv6 is decoupled from any particular link layer, as it + uses IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [12] instead of ARP. This also + improves the robustness of the protocol. + + o The use of IPv6 encapsulation (and the routing header) removes the + need in Mobile IPv6 to manage "tunnel soft state". + + o The dynamic home agent address discovery mechanism in Mobile IPv6 + returns a single reply to the mobile node. The directed broadcast + approach used in IPv4 returns separate replies from each home + agent. + +3. Terminology + + The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", + "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this + document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119 [2]. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 7] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +3.1. General Terms + + IP + + Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6). + + node + + A device that implements IP. + + router + + A node that forwards IP packets not explicitly addressed to + itself. + + unicast routable address + + An identifier for a single interface such that a packet sent to it + from another IPv6 subnet is delivered to the interface identified + by that address. Accordingly, a unicast routable address must + have either a global or site-local scope (but not link-local). + + host + + Any node that is not a router. + + link + + A communication facility or medium over which nodes can + communicate at the link layer, such as an Ethernet (simple or + bridged). A link is the layer immediately below IP. + + interface + + A node's attachment to a link. + + subnet prefix + + A bit string that consists of some number of initial bits of an IP + address. + + interface identifier + + A number used to identify a node's interface on a link. The + interface identifier is the remaining low-order bits in the node's + IP address after the subnet prefix. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 8] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + link-layer address + + A link-layer identifier for an interface, such as IEEE 802 + addresses on Ethernet links. + + packet + + An IP header plus payload. + + security association + + An IPsec security association is a cooperative relationship formed + by the sharing of cryptographic keying material and associated + context. Security associations are simplex. That is, two + security associations are needed to protect bidirectional traffic + between two nodes, one for each direction. + + security policy database + + A database that specifies what security services are to be offered + to IP packets and in what fashion. + + destination option + + Destination options are carried by the IPv6 Destination Options + extension header. Destination options include optional + information that need be examined only by the IPv6 node given as + the destination address in the IPv6 header, not by routers in + between. Mobile IPv6 defines one new destination option, the Home + Address destination option (see Section 6.3). + + routing header + + A routing header may be present as an IPv6 header extension, and + indicates that the payload has to be delivered to a destination + IPv6 address in some way that is different from what would be + carried out by standard Internet routing. In this document, use + of the term "routing header" typically refers to use of a type 2 + routing header, as specified in Section 6.4. + + "|" (concatenation) + + Some formulas in this specification use the symbol "|" to indicate + bytewise concatenation, as in A | B. This concatenation requires + that all of the octets of the datum A appear first in the result, + followed by all of the octets of the datum B. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 9] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + First (size, input) + + Some formulas in this specification use a functional form "First + (size, input)" to indicate truncation of the "input" data so that + only the first "size" bits remain to be used. + +3.2. Mobile IPv6 Terms + + home address + + A unicast routable address assigned to a mobile node, used as the + permanent address of the mobile node. This address is within the + mobile node's home link. Standard IP routing mechanisms will + deliver packets destined for a mobile node's home address to its + home link. Mobile nodes can have multiple home addresses, for + instance when there are multiple home prefixes on the home link. + + home subnet prefix + + The IP subnet prefix corresponding to a mobile node's home + address. + + home link + + The link on which a mobile node's home subnet prefix is defined. + + mobile node + + A node that can change its point of attachment from one link to + another, while still being reachable via its home address. + + movement + + A change in a mobile node's point of attachment to the Internet + such that it is no longer connected to the same link as it was + previously. If a mobile node is not currently attached to its + home link, the mobile node is said to be "away from home". + + L2 handover + + A process by which the mobile node changes from one link-layer + connection to another. For example, a change of wireless access + point is an L2 handover. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 10] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + L3 handover + + Subsequent to an L2 handover, a mobile node detects a change in an + on-link subnet prefix that would require a change in the primary + care-of address. For example, a change of access router + subsequent to a change of wireless access point typically results + in an L3 handover. + + correspondent node + + A peer node with which a mobile node is communicating. The + correspondent node may be either mobile or stationary. + + foreign subnet prefix + + Any IP subnet prefix other than the mobile node's home subnet + prefix. + + foreign link + + Any link other than the mobile node's home link. + + care-of address + + A unicast routable address associated with a mobile node while + visiting a foreign link; the subnet prefix of this IP address is a + foreign subnet prefix. Among the multiple care-of addresses that + a mobile node may have at any given time (e.g., with different + subnet prefixes), the one registered with the mobile node's home + agent for a given home address is called its "primary" care-of + address. + + home agent + + A router on a mobile node's home link with which the mobile node + has registered its current care-of address. While the mobile node + is away from home, the home agent intercepts packets on the home + link destined to the mobile node's home address, encapsulates + them, and tunnels them to the mobile node's registered care-of + address. + + binding + + The association of the home address of a mobile node with a care- + of address for that mobile node, along with the remaining lifetime + of that association. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 11] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + registration + + The process during which a mobile node sends a Binding Update to + its home agent or a correspondent node, causing a binding for the + mobile node to be registered. + + mobility message + + A message containing a Mobility Header (see Section 6.1). + + binding authorization + + Correspondent registration needs to be authorized to allow the + recipient to believe that the sender has the right to specify a + new binding. + + return routability procedure + + The return routability procedure authorizes registrations by the + use of a cryptographic token exchange. + + correspondent registration + + A return routability procedure followed by a registration, run + between the mobile node and a correspondent node. + + home registration + + A registration between the mobile node and its home agent, + authorized by the use of IPsec. + + nonce + + Nonces are random numbers used internally by the correspondent + node in the creation of keygen tokens related to the return + routability procedure. The nonces are not specific to a mobile + node, and are kept secret within the correspondent node. + + nonce index + + A nonce index is used to indicate which nonces have been used when + creating keygen token values, without revealing the nonces + themselves. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 12] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + cookie + + A cookie is a random number used by a mobile node to prevent + spoofing by a bogus correspondent node in the return routability + procedure. + + care-of init cookie + + A cookie sent to the correspondent node in the Care-of Test Init + message, to be returned in the Care-of Test message. + + home init cookie + + A cookie sent to the correspondent node in the Home Test Init + message, to be returned in the Home Test message. + + keygen token + + A keygen token is a number supplied by a correspondent node in the + return routability procedure to enable the mobile node to compute + the necessary binding management key for authorizing a Binding + Update. + + care-of keygen token + + A keygen token sent by the correspondent node in the Care-of Test + message. + + home keygen token + + A keygen token sent by the correspondent node in the Home Test + message. + + binding management key (Kbm) + + A binding management key (Kbm) is a key used for authorizing a + binding cache management message (e.g., Binding Update or Binding + Acknowledgement). Return routability provides a way to create a + binding management key. + +4. Overview of Mobile IPv6 + +4.1. Basic Operation + + A mobile node is always expected to be addressable at its home + address, whether it is currently attached to its home link or is away + from home. The "home address" is an IP address assigned to the + mobile node within its home subnet prefix on its home link. While a + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 13] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + mobile node is at home, packets addressed to its home address are + routed to the mobile node's home link, using conventional Internet + routing mechanisms. + + While a mobile node is attached to some foreign link away from home, + it is also addressable at one or more care-of addresses. A care-of + address is an IP address associated with a mobile node that has the + subnet prefix of a particular foreign link. The mobile node can + acquire its care-of address through conventional IPv6 mechanisms, + such as stateless or stateful auto-configuration. As long as the + mobile node stays in this location, packets addressed to this care-of + address will be routed to the mobile node. The mobile node may also + accept packets from several care-of addresses, such as when it is + moving but still reachable at the previous link. + + The association between a mobile node's home address and care-of + address is known as a "binding" for the mobile node. While away from + home, a mobile node registers its primary care-of address with a + router on its home link, requesting this router to function as the + "home agent" for the mobile node. The mobile node performs this + binding registration by sending a "Binding Update" message to the + home agent. The home agent replies to the mobile node by returning a + "Binding Acknowledgement" message. The operation of the mobile node + is specified in Section 11, and the operation of the home agent is + specified in Section 10. + + Any node communicating with a mobile node is referred to in this + document as a "correspondent node" of the mobile node, and may itself + be either a stationary node or a mobile node. Mobile nodes can + provide information about their current location to correspondent + nodes. This happens through the correspondent registration. As a + part of this procedure, a return routability test is performed in + order to authorize the establishment of the binding. The operation + of the correspondent node is specified in Section 9. + + There are two possible modes for communications between the mobile + node and a correspondent node. The first mode, bidirectional + tunneling, does not require Mobile IPv6 support from the + correspondent node and is available even if the mobile node has not + registered its current binding with the correspondent node. Packets + from the correspondent node are routed to the home agent and then + tunneled to the mobile node. Packets to the correspondent node are + tunneled from the mobile node to the home agent ("reverse tunneled") + and then routed normally from the home network to the correspondent + node. In this mode, the home agent uses proxy Neighbor Discovery to + intercept any IPv6 packets addressed to the mobile node's home + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 14] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + address (or home addresses) on the home link. Each intercepted + packet is tunneled to the mobile node's primary care-of address. + This tunneling is performed using IPv6 encapsulation [15]. + + The second mode, "route optimization", requires the mobile node to + register its current binding at the correspondent node. Packets from + the correspondent node can be routed directly to the care-of address + of the mobile node. When sending a packet to any IPv6 destination, + the correspondent node checks its cached bindings for an entry for + the packet's destination address. If a cached binding for this + destination address is found, the node uses a new type of IPv6 + routing header [11] (see Section 6.4) to route the packet to the + mobile node by way of the care-of address indicated in this binding. + + Routing packets directly to the mobile node's care-of address allows + the shortest communications path to be used. It also eliminates + congestion at the mobile node's home agent and home link. In + addition, the impact of any possible failure of the home agent or + networks on the path to or from it is reduced. + + When routing packets directly to the mobile node, the correspondent + node sets the Destination Address in the IPv6 header to the care-of + address of the mobile node. A new type of IPv6 routing header (see + Section 6.4) is also added to the packet to carry the desired home + address. Similarly, the mobile node sets the Source Address in the + packet's IPv6 header to its current care-of addresses. The mobile + node adds a new IPv6 "Home Address" destination option (see Section + 6.3) to carry its home address. The inclusion of home addresses in + these packets makes the use of the care-of address transparent above + the network layer (e.g., at the transport layer). + + Mobile IPv6 also provides support for multiple home agents, and a + limited support for the reconfiguration of the home network. In + these cases, the mobile node may not know the IP address of its own + home agent, and even the home subnet prefixes may change over time. + A mechanism, known as "dynamic home agent address discovery" allows a + mobile node to dynamically discover the IP address of a home agent on + its home link, even when the mobile node is away from home. Mobile + nodes can also learn new information about home subnet prefixes + through the "mobile prefix discovery" mechanism. These mechanisms + are described starting from Section 6.5. + +4.2. New IPv6 Protocol + + Mobile IPv6 defines a new IPv6 protocol, using the Mobility Header + (see Section 6.1). This Header is used to carry the following + messages: + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 15] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Home Test Init + + Home Test + + Care-of Test Init + + Care-of Test + + These four messages are used to perform the return routability + procedure from the mobile node to a correspondent node. This + ensures authorization of subsequent Binding Updates, as described + in Section 5.2.5. + + Binding Update + + A Binding Update is used by a mobile node to notify a + correspondent node or the mobile node's home agent of its current + binding. The Binding Update sent to the mobile node's home agent + to register its primary care-of address is marked as a "home + registration". + + Binding Acknowledgement + + A Binding Acknowledgement is used to acknowledge receipt of a + Binding Update, if an acknowledgement was requested in the Binding + Update, the binding update was sent to a home agent, or an error + occurred. + + Binding Refresh Request + + A Binding Refresh Request is used by a correspondent node to + request a mobile node to re-establish its binding with the + correspondent node. This message is typically used when the + cached binding is in active use but the binding's lifetime is + close to expiration. The correspondent node may use, for + instance, recent traffic and open transport layer connections as + an indication of active use. + + Binding Error + + The Binding Error is used by the correspondent node to signal an + error related to mobility, such as an inappropriate attempt to use + the Home Address destination option without an existing binding. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 16] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +4.3. New IPv6 Destination Option + + Mobile IPv6 defines a new IPv6 destination option, the Home Address + destination option. This option is described in detail in Section + 6.3. + +4.4. New IPv6 ICMP Messages + + Mobile IPv6 also introduces four new ICMP message types, two for use + in the dynamic home agent address discovery mechanism, and two for + renumbering and mobile configuration mechanisms. As described in + Section 10.5 and Section 11.4.1, the following two new ICMP message + types are used for home agent address discovery: + + o Home Agent Address Discovery Request, described in Section 6.5. + + o Home Agent Address Discovery Reply, described in Section 6.6. + + The next two message types are used for network renumbering and + address configuration on the mobile node, as described in Section + 10.6: + + o Mobile Prefix Solicitation, described in Section 6.7. + + o Mobile Prefix Advertisement, described in Section 6.8. + +4.5. Conceptual Data Structure Terminology + + This document describes the Mobile IPv6 protocol in terms of the + following conceptual data structures: + + Binding Cache + + A cache of bindings for other nodes. This cache is maintained by + home agents and correspondent nodes. The cache contains both + "correspondent registration" entries (see Section 9.1) and "home + registration" entries (see Section 10.1). + + Binding Update List + + This list is maintained by each mobile node. The list has an item + for every binding that the mobile node has or is trying to + establish with a specific other node. Both correspondent and home + registrations are included in this list. Entries from the list + are deleted as the lifetime of the binding expires. See Section + 11.1. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 17] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Home Agents List + + Home agents need to know which other home agents are on the same + link. This information is stored in the Home Agents List, as + described in more detail in Section 10.1. The list is used for + informing mobile nodes during dynamic home agent address + discovery. + +4.6. Site-Local Addressability + + This specification requires that home and care-of addresses MUST be + unicast routable addresses. Site-local addresses may be usable on + networks that are not connected to the Internet, but this + specification does not define when such usage is safe and when it is + not. Mobile nodes may not be aware of which site they are currently + in, it is hard to prevent accidental attachment to other sites, and + ambiguity of site-local addresses can cause problems if the home and + visited networks use the same addresses. Therefore, site-local + addresses SHOULD NOT be used as home or care-of addresses. + +5. Overview of Mobile IPv6 Security + + This specification provides a number of security features. These + include the protection of Binding Updates both to home agents and + correspondent nodes, the protection of mobile prefix discovery, and + the protection of the mechanisms that Mobile IPv6 uses for + transporting data packets. + + Binding Updates are protected by the use of IPsec extension headers, + or by the use of the Binding Authorization Data option. This option + employs a binding management key, Kbm, which can be established + through the return routability procedure. Mobile prefix discovery is + protected through the use of IPsec extension headers. Mechanisms + related to transporting payload packets - such as the Home Address + destination option and type 2 routing header - have been specified in + a manner which restricts their use in attacks. + +5.1. Binding Updates to Home Agents + + The mobile node and the home agent MUST use an IPsec security + association to protect the integrity and authenticity of the Binding + Updates and Acknowledgements. Both the mobile nodes and the home + agents MUST support and SHOULD use the Encapsulating Security Payload + (ESP) [6] header in transport mode and MUST use a non-NULL payload + authentication algorithm to provide data origin authentication, + connectionless integrity and optional anti-replay protection. Note + that Authentication Header (AH) [5] is also possible but for brevity + not discussed in this specification. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 18] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + In order to protect messages exchanged between the mobile node and + the home agent with IPsec, appropriate security policy database + entries must be created. A mobile node must be prevented from using + its security association to send a Binding Update on behalf of + another mobile node using the same home agent. This MUST be achieved + by having the home agent check that the given home address has been + used with the right security association. Such a check is provided + in the IPsec processing, by having the security policy database + entries unequivocally identify a single security association for + protecting Binding Updates between any given home address and home + agent. In order to make this possible, it is necessary that the home + address of the mobile node is visible in the Binding Updates and + Acknowledgements. The home address is used in these packets as a + source or destination, or in the Home Address Destination option or + the type 2 routing header. + + As with all IPsec security associations in this specification, manual + configuration of security associations MUST be supported. The used + shared secrets MUST be random and unique for different mobile nodes, + and MUST be distributed off-line to the mobile nodes. + + Automatic key management with IKE [9] MAY be supported. When IKE is + used, either the security policy database entries or the Mobile IPv6 + processing MUST unequivocally identify the IKE phase 1 credentials + which can be used to authorize the creation of security associations + for protecting Binding Updates for a particular home address. How + these mappings are maintained is outside the scope of this + specification, but they may be maintained, for instance, as a locally + administered table in the home agent. If the phase 1 identity is a + Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN), secure forms of DNS may also be + used. + + Section 11.3.2 discusses how IKE connections to the home agent need a + careful treatment of the addresses used for transporting IKE. This + is necessary to ensure that a Binding Update is not needed before the + IKE exchange which is needed for securing the Binding Update. + + When IKE version 1 is used with preshared secret authentication + between the mobile node and the home agent, aggressive mode MUST be + used. + + The ID_IPV6_ADDR Identity Payload MUST NOT be used in IKEv1 phase 1. + + Reference [21] contains a more detailed description and examples on + using IPsec to protect the communications between the mobile node and + the home agent. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 19] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +5.2. Binding Updates to Correspondent Nodes + + The protection of Binding Updates sent to correspondent nodes does + not require the configuration of security associations or the + existence of an authentication infrastructure between the mobile + nodes and correspondent nodes. Instead, a method called the return + routability procedure is used to assure that the right mobile node is + sending the message. This method does not protect against attackers + who are on the path between the home network and the correspondent + node. However, attackers in such a location are capable of + performing the same attacks even without Mobile IPv6. The main + advantage of the return routability procedure is that it limits the + potential attackers to those having an access to one specific path in + the Internet, and avoids forged Binding Updates from anywhere else in + the Internet. For a more in depth explanation of the security + properties of the return routability procedure, see Section 15. + + The integrity and authenticity of the Binding Updates messages to + correspondent nodes is protected by using a keyed-hash algorithm. + The binding management key, Kbm, is used to key the hash algorithm + for this purpose. Kbm is established using data exchanged during the + return routability procedure. The data exchange is accomplished by + use of node keys, nonces, cookies, tokens, and certain cryptographic + functions. Section 5.2.5 outlines the basic return routability + procedure. Section 5.2.6 shows how the results of this procedure are + used to authorize a Binding Update to a correspondent node. + +5.2.1. Node Keys + + Each correspondent node has a secret key, Kcn, called the "node key", + which it uses to produce the keygen tokens sent to the mobile nodes. + The node key MUST be a random number, 20 octets in length. The node + key allows the correspondent node to verify that the keygen tokens + used by the mobile node in authorizing a Binding Update are indeed + its own. This key MUST NOT be shared with any other entity. + + A correspondent node MAY generate a fresh node key at any time; this + avoids the need for secure persistent key storage. Procedures for + optionally updating the node key are discussed later in Section + 5.2.7. + +5.2.2. Nonces + + Each correspondent node also generates nonces at regular intervals. + The nonces should be generated by using a random number generator + that is known to have good randomness properties [1]. A + correspondent node may use the same Kcn and nonce with all the + mobiles it is in communication with. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 20] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Each nonce is identified by a nonce index. When a new nonce is + generated, it must be associated with a new nonce index; this may be + done, for example, by incrementing the value of the previous nonce + index, if the nonce index is used as an array pointer into a linear + array of nonces. However, there is no requirement that nonces be + stored that way, or that the values of subsequent nonce indices have + any particular relationship to each other. The index value is + communicated in the protocol, so that if a nonce is replaced by new + nonce during the run of a protocol, the correspondent node can + distinguish messages that should be checked against the old nonce + from messages that should be checked against the new nonce. Strictly + speaking, indices are not necessary in the authentication, but allow + the correspondent node to efficiently find the nonce value that it + used in creating a keygen token. + + Correspondent nodes keep both the current nonce and a small set of + valid previous nonces whose lifetime has not yet expired. Expired + values MUST be discarded, and messages using stale or unknown indices + will be rejected. + + The specific nonce index values cannot be used by mobile nodes to + determine the validity of the nonce. Expected validity times for the + nonces values and the procedures for updating them are discussed + later in Section 5.2.7. + + A nonce is an octet string of any length. The recommended length is + 64 bits. + +5.2.3. Cookies and Tokens + + The return routability address test procedure uses cookies and keygen + tokens as opaque values within the test init and test messages, + respectively. + + o The "home init cookie" and "care-of init cookie" are 64 bit values + sent to the correspondent node from the mobile node, and later + returned to the mobile node. The home init cookie is sent in the + Home Test Init message, and returned in the Home Test message. + The care-of init cookie is sent in the Care-of Test Init message, + and returned in the Care-of Test message. + + o The "home keygen token" and "care-of keygen token" are 64-bit + values sent by the correspondent node to the mobile node via the + home agent (via the Home Test message) and the care-of address (by + the Care-of Test message), respectively. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 21] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The mobile node should set the home init or care-of init cookie to a + newly generated random number in every Home or Care-of Test Init + message it sends. The cookies are used to verify that the Home Test + or Care-of Test message matches the Home Test Init or Care-of Test + Init message, respectively. These cookies also serve to ensure that + parties who have not seen the request cannot spoof responses. + + Home and care-of keygen tokens are produced by the correspondent node + based on its currently active secret key (Kcn) and nonces, as well as + the home or care-of address (respectively). A keygen token is valid + as long as both the secret key (Kcn) and the nonce used to create it + are valid. + +5.2.4. Cryptographic Functions + + In this specification, the function used to compute hash values is + SHA1 [20]. Message Authentication Codes (MACs) are computed using + HMAC_SHA1 [25, 20]. HMAC_SHA1(K,m) denotes such a MAC computed on + message m with key K. + +5.2.5. Return Routability Procedure + + The Return Routability Procedure enables the correspondent node to + obtain some reasonable assurance that the mobile node is in fact + addressable at its claimed care-of address as well as at its home + address. Only with this assurance is the correspondent node able to + accept Binding Updates from the mobile node which would then instruct + the correspondent node to direct that mobile node's data traffic to + its claimed care-of address. + + This is done by testing whether packets addressed to the two claimed + addresses are routed to the mobile node. The mobile node can pass + the test only if it is able to supply proof that it received certain + data (the "keygen tokens") which the correspondent node sends to + those addresses. These data are combined by the mobile node into a + binding management key, denoted Kbm. + + The figure below shows the message flow for the return routability + procedure. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 22] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Mobile node Home agent Correspondent node + | | + | Home Test Init (HoTI) | | + |------------------------->|------------------------->| + | | | + | Care-of Test Init (CoTI) | + |---------------------------------------------------->| + | | + | | Home Test (HoT) | + |<-------------------------|<-------------------------| + | | | + | Care-of Test (CoT) | + |<----------------------------------------------------| + | | + + The Home and Care-of Test Init messages are sent at the same time. + The procedure requires very little processing at the correspondent + node, and the Home and Care-of Test messages can be returned quickly, + perhaps nearly simultaneously. These four messages form the return + routability procedure. + + Home Test Init + + A mobile node sends a Home Test Init message to the correspondent + node (via the home agent) to acquire the home keygen token. The + contents of the message can be summarized as follows: + + * Source Address = home address + + * Destination Address = correspondent + + * Parameters: + + + home init cookie + + The Home Test Init message conveys the mobile node's home address + to the correspondent node. The mobile node also sends along a + home init cookie that the correspondent node must return later. + The Home Test Init message is reverse tunneled through the home + agent. (The headers and addresses related to reverse tunneling + have been omitted from the above discussion of the message + contents.) The mobile node remembers these cookie values to + obtain some assurance that its protocol messages are being + processed by the desired correspondent node. + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 23] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Care-of Test Init + + The mobile node sends a Care-of Test Init message to the + correspondent node (directly, not via the home agent) to acquire + the care-of keygen token. The contents of this message can be + summarized as follows: + + * Source Address = care-of address + + * Destination Address = correspondent + + * Parameters: + + + care-of init cookie + + The Care-of Test Init message conveys the mobile node's care-of + address to the correspondent node. The mobile node also sends + along a care-of init cookie that the correspondent node must + return later. The Care-of Test Init message is sent directly to + the correspondent node. + + Home Test + + The Home Test message is sent in response to a Home Test Init + message. It is sent via the home agent. The contents of the + message are: + + * Source Address = correspondent + + * Destination Address = home address + + * Parameters: + + + home init cookie + + + home keygen token + + + home nonce index + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 24] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + When the correspondent node receives the Home Test Init message, + it generates a home keygen token as follows: + + home keygen token := + First (64, HMAC_SHA1 (Kcn, (home address | nonce | 0))) + + where | denotes concatenation. The final "0" inside the HMAC_SHA1 + function is a single zero octet, used to distinguish home and + care-of cookies from each other. + + The home keygen token is formed from the first 64 bits of the MAC. + The home keygen token tests that the mobile node can receive were + messages sent to its home address. Kcn is used in the production + of home keygen token in order to allow the correspondent node to + verify that it generated the home and care-of nonces, without + forcing the correspondent node to remember a list of all tokens it + has handed out. + + The Home Test message is sent to the mobile node via the home + network, where it is presumed that the home agent will tunnel the + message to the mobile node. This means that the mobile node needs + to already have sent a Binding Update to the home agent, so that + the home agent will have received and authorized the new care-of + address for the mobile node before the return routability + procedure. For improved security, the data passed between the + home agent and the mobile node is made immune to inspection and + passive attacks. Such protection is gained by encrypting the home + keygen token as it is tunneled from the home agent to the mobile + node as specified in Section 10.4.6. The security properties of + this additional security are discussed in Section 15.4.1. + + The home init cookie from the mobile node is returned in the Home + Test message, to ensure that the message comes from a node on the + route between the home agent and the correspondent node. + + The home nonce index is delivered to the mobile node to later + allow the correspondent node to efficiently find the nonce value + that it used in creating the home keygen token. + + Care-of Test + + This message is sent in response to a Care-of Test Init message. + This message is not sent via the home agent, it is sent directly + to the mobile node. The contents of the message are: + + * Source Address = correspondent + + * Destination Address = care-of address + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 25] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + * Parameters: + + + care-of init cookie + + + care-of keygen token + + + care-of nonce index + + When the correspondent node receives the Care-of Test Init + message, it generates a care-of keygen token as follows: + + care-of keygen token := + First (64, HMAC_SHA1 (Kcn, (care-of address | nonce | 1))) + + Here, the final "1" inside the HMAC_SHA1 function is a single + octet containing the hex value 0x01, and is used to distinguish + home and care-of cookies from each other. The keygen token is + formed from the first 64 bits of the MAC, and sent directly to the + mobile node at its care-of address. The care-of init cookie from + the Care-of Test Init message is returned to ensure that the + message comes from a node on the route to the correspondent node. + + The care-of nonce index is provided to identify the nonce used for + the care-of keygen token. The home and care-of nonce indices MAY + be the same, or different, in the Home and Care-of Test messages. + + When the mobile node has received both the Home and Care-of Test + messages, the return routability procedure is complete. As a result + of the procedure, the mobile node has the data it needs to send a + Binding Update to the correspondent node. The mobile node hashes the + tokens together to form a 20 octet binding key Kbm: + + Kbm = SHA1 (home keygen token | care-of keygen token) + + A Binding Update may also be used to delete a previously established + binding (Section 6.1.7). In this case, the care-of keygen token is + not used. Instead, the binding management key is generated as + follows: + + Kbm = SHA1(home keygen token) + + Note that the correspondent node does not create any state specific + to the mobile node, until it receives the Binding Update from that + mobile node. The correspondent node does not maintain the value for + the binding management key Kbm; it creates Kbm when given the nonce + indices and the mobile node's addresses. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 26] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +5.2.6. Authorizing Binding Management Messages + + After the mobile node has created the binding management key (Kbm), + it can supply a verifiable Binding Update to the correspondent node. + This section provides an overview of this registration. The below + figure shows the message flow. + + Mobile node Correspondent node + | | + | Binding Update (BU) | + |---------------------------------------------->| + | (MAC, seq#, nonce indices, care-of address) | + | | + | | + | Binding Acknowledgement (BA) (if sent) | + |<----------------------------------------------| + | (MAC, seq#, status) | + + Binding Update + + To authorize a Binding Update, the mobile node creates a binding + management key Kbm from the keygen tokens as described in the + previous section. The contents of the Binding Update include the + following: + + * Source Address = care-of address + + * Destination Address = correspondent + + * Parameters: + + + home address (within the Home Address destination option if + different from the Source Address) + + + sequence number (within the Binding Update message header) + + + home nonce index (within the Nonce Indices option) + + + care-of nonce index (within the Nonce Indices option) + + + First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, (care-of address | correspondent + | BU))) + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 27] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Binding Update contains a Nonce Indices option, indicating to + the correspondent node which home and care-of nonces to use to + recompute Kbm, the binding management key. The MAC is computed as + described in Section 6.2.7, using the correspondent node's address + as the destination address and the Binding Update message itself + ("BU" above) as the MH Data. + + Once the correspondent node has verified the MAC, it can create a + Binding Cache entry for the mobile. + + Binding Acknowledgement + + The Binding Update is in some cases acknowledged by the + correspondent node. The contents of the message are as follows: + + * Source Address = correspondent + + * Destination Address = care-of address + + * Parameters: + + + sequence number (within the Binding Update message header) + + + First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, (care-of address | correspondent + | BA))) + + The Binding Acknowledgement contains the same sequence number as + the Binding Update. The MAC is computed as described in Section + 6.2.7, using the correspondent node's address as the destination + address and the message itself ("BA" above) as the MH Data. + + Bindings established with correspondent nodes using keys created + by way of the return routability procedure MUST NOT exceed + MAX_RR_BINDING_LIFETIME seconds (see Section 12). + + The value in the Source Address field in the IPv6 header carrying + the Binding Update is normally also the care-of address which is + used in the binding. However, a different care-of address MAY be + specified by including an Alternate Care-of Address mobility + option in the Binding Update (see Section 6.2.5). When such a + message is sent to the correspondent node and the return + routability procedure is used as the authorization method, the + Care-of Test Init and Care-of Test messages MUST have been + performed for the address in the Alternate Care-of Address option + (not the Source Address). The nonce indices and MAC value MUST be + based on information gained in this test. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 28] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Binding Updates may also be sent to delete a previously + established binding. In this case, generation of the binding + management key depends exclusively on the home keygen token and + the care-of nonce index is ignored. + +5.2.7. Updating Node Keys and Nonces + + Correspondent nodes generate nonces at regular intervals. It is + recommended to keep each nonce (identified by a nonce index) + acceptable for at least MAX_TOKEN_LIFETIME seconds (see Section 12) + after it has been first used in constructing a return routability + message response. However, the correspondent node MUST NOT accept + nonces beyond MAX_NONCE_LIFETIME seconds (see Section 12) after the + first use. As the difference between these two constants is 30 + seconds, a convenient way to enforce the above lifetimes is to + generate a new nonce every 30 seconds. The node can then continue to + accept tokens that have been based on the last 8 (MAX_NONCE_LIFETIME + / 30) nonces. This results in tokens being acceptable + MAX_TOKEN_LIFETIME to MAX_NONCE_LIFETIME seconds after they have been + sent to the mobile node, depending on whether the token was sent at + the beginning or end of the first 30 second period. Note that the + correspondent node may also attempt to generate new nonces on demand, + or only if the old nonces have been used. This is possible, as long + as the correspondent node keeps track of how long a time ago the + nonces were used for the first time, and does not generate new nonces + on every return routability request. + + Due to resource limitations, rapid deletion of bindings, or reboots + the correspondent node may not in all cases recognize the nonces that + the tokens were based on. If a nonce index is unrecognized, the + correspondent node replies with an error code in the Binding + Acknowledgement (either 136, 137, or 138 as discussed in Section + 6.1.8). The mobile node can then retry the return routability + procedure. + + An update of Kcn SHOULD be done at the same time as an update of a + nonce, so that nonce indices can identify both the nonce and the key. + Old Kcn values have to be therefore remembered as long as old nonce + values. + + Given that the tokens are normally expected to be usable for + MAX_TOKEN_LIFETIME seconds, the mobile node MAY use them beyond a + single run of the return routability procedure until + MAX_TOKEN_LIFETIME expires. After this the mobile node SHOULD NOT + use the tokens. A fast moving mobile node MAY reuse a recent home + keygen token from a correspondent node when moving to a new location, + and just acquire a new care-of keygen token to show routability in + the new location. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 29] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + While this does not save the number of round-trips due to the + simultaneous processing of home and care-of return routability tests, + there are fewer messages being exchanged, and a potentially long + round-trip through the home agent is avoided. Consequently, this + optimization is often useful. A mobile node that has multiple home + addresses, MAY also use the same care-of keygen token for Binding + Updates concerning all of these addresses. + +5.2.8. Preventing Replay Attacks + + The return routability procedure also protects the participants + against replayed Binding Updates through the use of the sequence + number and a MAC. Care must be taken when removing bindings at the + correspondent node, however. Correspondent nodes must retain + bindings and the associated sequence number information at least as + long as the nonces used in the authorization of the binding are still + valid. Alternatively, if memory is very constrained, the + correspondent node MAY invalidate the nonces that were used for the + binding being deleted (or some larger group of nonces that they + belong to). This may, however, impact the ability to accept Binding + Updates from mobile nodes that have recently received keygen tokens. + This alternative is therefore recommended only as a last measure. + +5.3. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery + + No security is required for dynamic home agent address discovery. + +5.4. Mobile Prefix Discovery + + The mobile node and the home agent SHOULD use an IPsec security + association to protect the integrity and authenticity of the Mobile + Prefix Solicitations and Advertisements. Both the mobile nodes and + the home agents MUST support and SHOULD use the Encapsulating + Security Payload (ESP) header in transport mode with a non-NULL + payload authentication algorithm to provide data origin + authentication, connectionless integrity and optional anti-replay + protection. + +5.5. Payload Packets + + Payload packets exchanged with mobile nodes can be protected in the + usual manner, in the same way as stationary hosts can protect them. + However, Mobile IPv6 introduces the Home Address destination option, + a routing header, and tunneling headers in the payload packets. In + the following we define the security measures taken to protect these, + and to prevent their use in attacks against other parties. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 30] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + This specification limits the use of the Home Address destination + option to the situation where the correspondent node already has a + Binding Cache entry for the given home address. This avoids the use + of the Home Address option in attacks described in Section 15.1. + + Mobile IPv6 uses a Mobile IPv6 specific type of a routing header. + This type provides the necessary functionality but does not open + vulnerabilities discussed in Section 15.1. + + Tunnels between the mobile node and the home agent are protected by + ensuring proper use of source addresses, and optional cryptographic + protection. The mobile node verifies that the outer IP address + corresponds to its home agent. The home agent verifies that the + outer IP address corresponds to the current location of the mobile + node (Binding Updates sent to the home agents are secure). The home + agent identifies the mobile node through the source address of the + inner packet. (Typically, this is the home address of the mobile + node, but it can also be a link-local address, as discussed in + Section 10.4.2. To recognize the latter type of addresses, the home + agent requires that the Link-Local Address Compatibility (L) was set + in the Binding Update.) These measures protect the tunnels against + vulnerabilities discussed in Section 15.1. + + For traffic tunneled via the home agent, additional IPsec ESP + encapsulation MAY be supported and used. If multicast group + membership control protocols or stateful address autoconfiguration + protocols are supported, payload data protection MUST be supported. + +6. New IPv6 Protocol, Message Types, and Destination Option + +6.1. Mobility Header + + The Mobility Header is an extension header used by mobile nodes, + correspondent nodes, and home agents in all messaging related to the + creation and management of bindings. The subsections within this + section describe the message types that may be sent using the + Mobility Header. + + Mobility Header messages MUST NOT be sent with a type 2 routing + header, except as described in Section 9.5.4 for Binding + Acknowledgement. Mobility Header messages also MUST NOT be used with + a Home Address destination option, except as described in Section + 11.7.1 and Section 11.7.2 for Binding Update. Binding Update List or + Binding Cache information (when present) for the destination MUST NOT + be used in sending Mobility Header messages. That is, Mobility + Header messages bypass both the Binding Cache check described in + Section 9.3.2 and the Binding Update List check described in Section + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 31] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 11.3.1 which are normally performed for all packets. This applies + even to messages sent to or from a correspondent node which is itself + a mobile node. + +6.1.1. Format + + The Mobility Header is identified by a Next Header value of 135 in + the immediately preceding header, and has the following format: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Payload Proto | Header Len | MH Type | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Checksum | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + | | + . . + . Message Data . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Payload Proto + + 8-bit selector. Identifies the type of header immediately + following the Mobility Header. Uses the same values as the IPv6 + Next Header field [11]. + + This field is intended to be used by a future extension (see + Appendix B.1). + + Implementations conforming to this specification SHOULD set the + payload protocol type to IPPROTO_NONE (59 decimal). + + Header Len + + 8-bit unsigned integer, representing the length of the Mobility + Header in units of 8 octets, excluding the first 8 octets. + + The length of the Mobility Header MUST be a multiple of 8 octets. + + MH Type + + 8-bit selector. Identifies the particular mobility message in + question. Current values are specified in Section 6.1.2 and + onward. An unrecognized MH Type field causes an error indication + to be sent. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 32] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Reserved + + 8-bit field reserved for future use. The value MUST be + initialized to zero by the sender, and MUST be ignored by the + receiver. + + Checksum + + 16-bit unsigned integer. This field contains the checksum of the + Mobility Header. The checksum is calculated from the octet string + consisting of a "pseudo-header" followed by the entire Mobility + Header starting with the Payload Proto field. The checksum is the + 16-bit one's complement of the one's complement sum of this + string. + + The pseudo-header contains IPv6 header fields, as specified in + Section 8.1 of RFC 2460 [11]. The Next Header value used in the + pseudo-header is 2. The addresses used in the pseudo-header are + the addresses that appear in the Source and Destination Address + fields in the IPv6 packet carrying the Mobility Header. + + Note that the procedures of calculating upper layer checksums + while away from home described in Section 11.3.1 apply even for + the Mobility Header. If a mobility message has a Home Address + destination option, then the checksum calculation uses the home + address in this option as the value of the IPv6 Source Address + field. The type 2 routing header is treated as explained in [11]. + + The Mobility Header is considered as the upper layer protocol for + the purposes of calculating the pseudo-header. The Upper-Layer + Packet Length field in the pseudo-header MUST be set to the total + length of the Mobility Header. + + For computing the checksum, the checksum field is set to zero. + + Message Data + + A variable length field containing the data specific to the + indicated Mobility Header type. + + Mobile IPv6 also defines a number of "mobility options" for use + within these messages; if included, any options MUST appear after the + fixed portion of the message data specified in this document. The + presence of such options will be indicated by the Header Len field + within the message. When the Header Len value is greater than the + length required for the message specified here, the remaining octets + are interpreted as mobility options. These options include padding + options that can be used to ensure that other options are aligned + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 33] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + properly, and that the total length of the message is divisible by 8. + The encoding and format of defined options are described in Section + 6.2. + + Alignment requirements for the Mobility Header are the same as for + any IPv6 protocol Header. That is, they MUST be aligned on an 8- + octet boundary. + +6.1.2. Binding Refresh Request Message + + The Binding Refresh Request (BRR) message requests a mobile node to + update its mobility binding. This message is sent by correspondent + nodes according to the rules in Section 9.5.5. When a mobile node + receives a packet containing a Binding Refresh Request message it + processes the message according to the rules in Section 11.7.4. + + The Binding Refresh Request message uses the MH Type value 0. When + this value is indicated in the MH Type field, the format of the + Message Data field in the Mobility Header is as follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + . . + . Mobility options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Reserved + + 16-bit field reserved for future use. The value MUST be + initialized to zero by the sender, and MUST be ignored by the + receiver. + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The encoding + and format of defined options are described in Section 6.2. The + receiver MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not + understand. + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 34] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + There MAY be additional information, associated with this Binding + Refresh Request message that need not be present in all Binding + Refresh Request messages sent. Mobility options allow future + extensions to the format of the Binding Refresh Request message to + be defined. This specification does not define any options valid + for the Binding Refresh Request message. + + If no actual options are present in this message, no padding is + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 0. + +6.1.3. Home Test Init Message + + A mobile node uses the Home Test Init (HoTI) message to initiate the + return routability procedure and request a home keygen token from a + correspondent node (see Section 11.6.1). The Home Test Init message + uses the MH Type value 1. When this value is indicated in the MH + Type field, the format of the Message Data field in the Mobility + Header is as follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + Home Init Cookie + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + . . + . Mobility Options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Reserved + + 16-bit field reserved for future use. This value MUST be + initialized to zero by the sender, and MUST be ignored by the + receiver. + + Home Init Cookie + + 64-bit field which contains a random value, the home init cookie. + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The receiver + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 35] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not understand. + This specification does not define any options valid for the Home + Test Init message. + + If no actual options are present in this message, no padding is + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 1. + + This message is tunneled through the home agent when the mobile node + is away from home. Such tunneling SHOULD employ IPsec ESP in tunnel + mode between the home agent and the mobile node. This protection is + indicated by the IPsec security policy database. The protection of + Home Test Init messages is unrelated to the requirement to protect + regular payload traffic, which MAY use such tunnels as well. + +6.1.4. Care-of Test Init Message + + A mobile node uses the Care-of Test Init (CoTI) message to initiate + the return routability procedure and request a care-of keygen token + from a correspondent node (see Section 11.6.1). The Care-of Test + Init message uses the MH Type value 2. When this value is indicated + in the MH Type field, the format of the Message Data field in the + Mobility Header is as follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + Care-of Init Cookie + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + . . + . Mobility Options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Reserved + + 16-bit field reserved for future use. The value MUST be + initialized to zero by the sender, and MUST be ignored by the + receiver. + + Care-of Init Cookie + + 64-bit field which contains a random value, the care-of init + cookie. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 36] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The receiver + MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not understand. + This specification does not define any options valid for the + Care-of Test Init message. + + If no actual options are present in this message, no padding is + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 1. + +6.1.5. Home Test Message + + The Home Test (HoT) message is a response to the Home Test Init + message, and is sent from the correspondent node to the mobile node + (see Section 5.2.5). The Home Test message uses the MH Type value 3. + When this value is indicated in the MH Type field, the format of the + Message Data field in the Mobility Header is as follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Home Nonce Index | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + Home Init Cookie + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + Home Keygen Token + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + . . + . Mobility options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Home Nonce Index + + This field will be echoed back by the mobile node to the + correspondent node in a subsequent Binding Update. + + Home Init Cookie + + 64-bit field which contains the home init cookie. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 37] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Home Keygen Token + + This field contains the 64 bit home keygen token used in the + return routability procedure. + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The receiver + MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not understand. + This specification does not define any options valid for the Home + Test message. + + If no actual options are present in this message, no padding is + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 2. + +6.1.6. Care-of Test Message + + The Care-of Test (CoT) message is a response to the Care-of Test Init + message, and is sent from the correspondent node to the mobile node + (see Section 11.6.2). The Care-of Test message uses the MH Type + value 4. When this value is indicated in the MH Type field, the + format of the Message Data field in the Mobility Header is as + follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Care-of Nonce Index | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + Care-of Init Cookie + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + Care-of Keygen Token + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + . . + . Mobility Options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Care-of Nonce Index + + This value will be echoed back by the mobile node to the + correspondent node in a subsequent Binding Update. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 38] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Care-of Init Cookie + + 64-bit field which contains the care-of init cookie. + + Care-of Keygen Token + + This field contains the 64 bit care-of keygen token used in the + return routability procedure. + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The receiver + MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not understand. + This specification does not define any options valid for the + Care-of Test message. + + If no actual options are present in this message, no padding is + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 2. + +6.1.7. Binding Update Message + + The Binding Update (BU) message is used by a mobile node to notify + other nodes of a new care-of address for itself. Binding Updates are + sent as described in Section 11.7.1 and Section 11.7.2. + + The Binding Update uses the MH Type value 5. When this value is + indicated in the MH Type field, the format of the Message Data field + in the Mobility Header is as follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Sequence # | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + |A|H|L|K| Reserved | Lifetime | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + . . + . Mobility options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Acknowledge (A) + + The Acknowledge (A) bit is set by the sending mobile node to + request a Binding Acknowledgement (Section 6.1.8) be returned upon + receipt of the Binding Update. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 39] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Home Registration (H) + + The Home Registration (H) bit is set by the sending mobile node to + request that the receiving node should act as this node's home + agent. The destination of the packet carrying this message MUST + be that of a router sharing the same subnet prefix as the home + address of the mobile node in the binding. + + Link-Local Address Compatibility (L) + + The Link-Local Address Compatibility (L) bit is set when the home + address reported by the mobile node has the same interface + identifier as the mobile node's link-local address. + + Key Management Mobility Capability (K) + + If this bit is cleared, the protocol used for establishing the + IPsec security associations between the mobile node and the home + agent does not survive movements. It may then have to be rerun. + (Note that the IPsec security associations themselves are expected + to survive movements.) If manual IPsec configuration is used, the + bit MUST be cleared. + + This bit is valid only in Binding Updates sent to the home agent, + and MUST be cleared in other Binding Updates. Correspondent nodes + MUST ignore this bit. + + Reserved + + These fields are unused. They MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + Sequence # + + A 16-bit unsigned integer used by the receiving node to sequence + Binding Updates and by the sending node to match a returned + Binding Acknowledgement with this Binding Update. + + Lifetime + + 16-bit unsigned integer. The number of time units remaining + before the binding MUST be considered expired. A value of zero + indicates that the Binding Cache entry for the mobile node MUST be + deleted. (In this case the specified care-of address MUST also be + set equal to the home address.) One time unit is 4 seconds. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 40] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The encoding + and format of defined options are described in Section 6.2. The + receiver MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not + understand. + + The following options are valid in a Binding Update: + + * Binding Authorization Data option (this option is mandatory in + Binding Updates sent to a correspondent node) + + * Nonce Indices option. + + * Alternate Care-of Address option + + If no options are present in this message, 4 octets of padding are + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 1. + + The care-of address is specified either by the Source Address field + in the IPv6 header or by the Alternate Care-of Address option, if + present. The care-of address MUST be a unicast routable address. + IPv6 Source Address MUST be a topologically correct source address. + Binding Updates for a care-of address which is not a unicast routable + address MUST be silently discarded. Similarly, the Binding Update + MUST be silently discarded if the care-of address appears as a home + address in an existing Binding Cache entry, with its current location + creating a circular reference back to the home address specified in + the Binding Update (possibly through additional entries). + + The deletion of a binding can be indicated by setting the Lifetime + field to 0 and by setting the care-of address equal to the home + address. In deletion, the generation of the binding management key + depends exclusively on the home keygen token, as explained in Section + 5.2.5. (Note that while the senders are required to set both the + Lifetime field to 0 and the care-of address equal to the home + address, Section 9.5.1 rules for receivers are more liberal, and + interpret either condition as a deletion.) + + Correspondent nodes SHOULD NOT delete the Binding Cache entry before + the lifetime expires, if any application hosted by the correspondent + node is still likely to require communication with the mobile node. + A Binding Cache entry that is de-allocated prematurely might cause + subsequent packets to be dropped from the mobile node, if they + contain the Home Address destination option. This situation is + recoverable, since a Binding Error message is sent to the mobile node + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 41] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + (see Section 6.1.9); however, it causes unnecessary delay in the + communications. + +6.1.8. Binding Acknowledgement Message + + The Binding Acknowledgement is used to acknowledge receipt of a + Binding Update (Section 6.1.7). This packet is sent as described in + Section 9.5.4 and Section 10.3.1. + + The Binding Acknowledgement has the MH Type value 6. When this value + is indicated in the MH Type field, the format of the Message Data + field in the Mobility Header is as follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Status |K| Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Sequence # | Lifetime | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + . . + . Mobility options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Key Management Mobility Capability (K) + + If this bit is cleared, the protocol used by the home agent for + establishing the IPsec security associations between the mobile + node and the home agent does not survive movements. It may then + have to be rerun. (Note that the IPsec security associations + themselves are expected to survive movements.) + + Correspondent nodes MUST set the K bit to 0. + + Reserved + + These fields are unused. They MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 42] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Status + + 8-bit unsigned integer indicating the disposition of the Binding + Update. Values of the Status field less than 128 indicate that + the Binding Update was accepted by the receiving node. Values + greater than or equal to 128 indicate that the Binding Update was + rejected by the receiving node. The following Status values are + currently defined: + + 0 Binding Update accepted + + 1 Accepted but prefix discovery necessary + + 128 Reason unspecified + + 129 Administratively prohibited + + 130 Insufficient resources + + 131 Home registration not supported + + 132 Not home subnet + + 133 Not home agent for this mobile node + + 134 Duplicate Address Detection failed + + 135 Sequence number out of window + + 136 Expired home nonce index + + 137 Expired care-of nonce index + + 138 Expired nonces + + 139 Registration type change disallowed + + Up-to-date values of the Status field are to be specified in the IANA + registry of assigned numbers [19]. + + Sequence # + + The Sequence Number in the Binding Acknowledgement is copied from + the Sequence Number field in the Binding Update. It is used by + the mobile node in matching this Binding Acknowledgement with an + outstanding Binding Update. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 43] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Lifetime + + The granted lifetime, in time units of 4 seconds, for which this + node SHOULD retain the entry for this mobile node in its Binding + Cache. + + The value of this field is undefined if the Status field indicates + that the Binding Update was rejected. + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The encoding + and format of defined options are described in Section 6.2. The + receiver MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not + understand. + + There MAY be additional information, associated with this Binding + Acknowledgement that need not be present in all Binding + Acknowledgements sent. Mobility options allow future extensions + to the format of the Binding Acknowledgement to be defined. The + following options are valid for the Binding Acknowledgement: + + * Binding Authorization Data option (this option is mandatory in + Binding Acknowledgements sent by a correspondent node, except + where otherwise noted in Section 9.5.4) + + * Binding Refresh Advice option + + If no options are present in this message, 4 octets of padding are + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 1. + +6.1.9. Binding Error Message + + The Binding Error (BE) message is used by the correspondent node to + signal an error related to mobility, such as an inappropriate attempt + to use the Home Address destination option without an existing + binding; see Section 9.3.3 for details. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 44] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Binding Error message uses the MH Type value 7. When this value + is indicated in the MH Type field, the format of the Message Data + field in the Mobility Header is as follows: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Status | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + + + | | + + Home Address + + | | + + + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + . . + . Mobility Options . + . . + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Status + + 8-bit unsigned integer indicating the reason for this message. + The following values are currently defined: + + 1 Unknown binding for Home Address destination option + + 2 Unrecognized MH Type value + + Reserved + + A 8-bit field reserved for future use. The value MUST be + initialized to zero by the sender, and MUST be ignored by the + receiver. + + Home Address + + The home address that was contained in the Home Address + destination option. The mobile node uses this information to + determine which binding does not exist, in cases where the mobile + node has several home addresses. + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 45] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Mobility Options + + Variable-length field of such length that the complete Mobility + Header is an integer multiple of 8 octets long. This field + contains zero or more TLV-encoded mobility options. The receiver + MUST ignore and skip any options which it does not understand. + + There MAY be additional information, associated with this Binding + Error message that need not be present in all Binding Error + messages sent. Mobility options allow future extensions to the + format of the format of the Binding Error message to be defined. + The encoding and format of defined options are described in + Section 6.2. This specification does not define any options valid + for the Binding Error message. + + If no actual options are present in this message, no padding is + necessary and the Header Len field will be set to 2. + +6.2. Mobility Options + + Mobility messages can include zero or more mobility options. This + allows optional fields that may not be needed in every use of a + particular Mobility Header, as well as future extensions to the + format of the messages. Such options are included in the Message + Data field of the message itself, after the fixed portion of the + message data specified in the message subsections of Section 6.1. + + The presence of such options will be indicated by the Header Len of + the Mobility Header. If included, the Binding Authorization Data + option (Section 6.2.7) MUST be the last option and MUST NOT have + trailing padding. Otherwise, options can be placed in any order. + +6.2.1. Format + + Mobility options are encoded within the remaining space of the + Message Data field of a mobility message, using a type-length-value + (TLV) format as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Option Type | Option Length | Option Data... + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 46] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Option Type + + 8-bit identifier of the type of mobility option. When processing + a Mobility Header containing an option for which the Option Type + value is not recognized by the receiver, the receiver MUST quietly + ignore and skip over the option, correctly handling any remaining + options in the message. + + Option Length + + 8-bit unsigned integer, representing the length in octets of the + mobility option, not including the Option Type and Option Length + fields. + + Option Data + + A variable length field that contains data specific to the option. + + The following subsections specify the Option types which are + currently defined for use in the Mobility Header. + + Implementations MUST silently ignore any mobility options that they + do not understand. + + Mobility options may have alignment requirements. Following the + convention in IPv6, these options are aligned in a packet so that + multi-octet values within the Option Data field of each option fall + on natural boundaries (i.e., fields of width n octets are placed at + an integer multiple of n octets from the start of the header, for n = + 1, 2, 4, or 8) [11]. + +6.2.2. Pad1 + + The Pad1 option does not have any alignment requirements. Its format + is as follows: + + 0 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type = 0 | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + NOTE! the format of the Pad1 option is a special case - it has + neither Option Length nor Option Data fields. + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 47] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Pad1 option is used to insert one octet of padding in the + Mobility Options area of a Mobility Header. If more than one octet + of padding is required, the PadN option, described next, should be + used rather than multiple Pad1 options. + +6.2.3. PadN + + The PadN option does not have any alignment requirements. Its format + is as follows: + + 0 1 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- - - - - - - - - + | Type = 1 | Option Length | Option Data + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- - - - - - - - - + + The PadN option is used to insert two or more octets of padding in + the Mobility Options area of a mobility message. For N octets of + padding, the Option Length field contains the value N-2, and the + Option Data consists of N-2 zero-valued octets. PadN Option data + MUST be ignored by the receiver. + +6.2.4. Binding Refresh Advice + + The Binding Refresh Advice option has an alignment requirement of 2n. + Its format is as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type = 2 | Length = 2 | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Refresh Interval | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + The Binding Refresh Advice option is only valid in the Binding + Acknowledgement, and only on Binding Acknowledgements sent from the + mobile node's home agent in reply to a home registration. The + Refresh Interval is measured in units of four seconds, and indicates + remaining time until the mobile node SHOULD send a new home + registration to the home agent. The Refresh Interval MUST be set to + indicate a smaller time interval than the Lifetime value of the + Binding Acknowledgement. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 48] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +6.2.5. Alternate Care-of Address + + The Alternate Care-of Address option has an alignment requirement of + 8n+6. Its format is as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type = 3 | Length = 16 | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + + + | | + + Alternate Care-of Address + + | | + + + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Normally, a Binding Update specifies the desired care-of address in + the Source Address field of the IPv6 header. However, this is not + possible in some cases, such as when the mobile node wishes to + indicate a care-of address which it cannot use as a topologically + correct source address (Section 6.1.7 and Section 11.7.2) or when the + used security mechanism does not protect the IPv6 header (Section + 11.7.1). + + The Alternate Care-of Address option is provided for these + situations. This option is valid only in Binding Update. The + Alternate Care-of Address field contains an address to use as the + care-of address for the binding, rather than using the Source Address + of the packet as the care-of address. + +6.2.6. Nonce Indices + + The Nonce Indices option has an alignment requirement of 2n. Its + format is as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type = 4 | Length = 4 | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Home Nonce Index | Care-of Nonce Index | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 49] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Nonce Indices option is valid only in the Binding Update message + sent to a correspondent node, and only when present together with a + Binding Authorization Data option. When the correspondent node + authorizes the Binding Update, it needs to produce home and care-of + keygen tokens from its stored random nonce values. + + The Home Nonce Index field tells the correspondent node which nonce + value to use when producing the home keygen token. + + The Care-of Nonce Index field is ignored in requests to delete a + binding. Otherwise, it tells the correspondent node which nonce + value to use when producing the care-of keygen token. + +6.2.7. Binding Authorization Data + + The Binding Authorization Data option does not have alignment + requirements as such. However, since this option must be the last + mobility option, an implicit alignment requirement is 8n + 2. The + format of this option is as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type = 5 | Option Length | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + + + | Authenticator | + + + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + The Binding Authorization Data option is valid in the Binding Update + and Binding Acknowledgement. + + The Option Length field contains the length of the authenticator in + octets. + + The Authenticator field contains a cryptographic value which can be + used to determine that the message in question comes from the right + authority. Rules for calculating this value depends on the used + authorization procedure. + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 50] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + For the return routability procedure, this option can appear in the + Binding Update and Binding Acknowledgements. Rules for calculating + the Authenticator value are the following: + + Mobility Data = care-of address | correspondent | MH Data + Authenticator = First (96, HMAC_SHA1 (Kbm, Mobility Data)) + + Where | denotes concatenation. "Care-of address" is the care-of + address which will be registered for the mobile node if the Binding + Update succeeds, or the home address of the mobile node if this + option is used in de-registration. Note also that this address might + be different from the source address of the Binding Update message, + if the Alternative Care-of Address mobility option is used, or when + the lifetime of the binding is set to zero. + + The "correspondent" is the IPv6 address of the correspondent node. + Note that, if the message is sent to a destination which is itself + mobile, the "correspondent" address may not be the address found in + the Destination Address field of the IPv6 header; instead the home + address from the type 2 Routing header should be used. + + "MH Data" is the content of the Mobility Header, excluding the + Authenticator field itself. The Authenticator value is calculated as + if the Checksum field in the Mobility Header was zero. The Checksum + in the transmitted packet is still calculated in the usual manner, + with the calculated Authenticator being a part of the packet + protected by the Checksum. Kbm is the binding management key, which + is typically created using nonces provided by the correspondent node + (see Section 9.4). Note that while the contents of a potential Home + Address destination option are not covered in this formula, the rules + for the calculation of the Kbm do take the home address in account. + This ensures that the MAC will be different for different home + addresses. + + The first 96 bits from the MAC result are used as the Authenticator + field. + +6.3. Home Address Option + + The Home Address option is carried by the Destination Option + extension header (Next Header value = 60). It is used in a packet + sent by a mobile node while away from home, to inform the recipient + of the mobile node's home address. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 51] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Home Address option is encoded in type-length-value (TLV) format + as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Option Type | Option Length | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + + + | | + + Home Address + + | | + + + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Option Type + + 201 = 0xC9 + + Option Length + + 8-bit unsigned integer. Length of the option, in octets, + excluding the Option Type and Option Length fields. This field + MUST be set to 16. + + Home Address + + The home address of the mobile node sending the packet. This + address MUST be a unicast routable address. + + The alignment requirement [11] for the Home Address option is 8n+6. + + The three highest-order bits of the Option Type field are encoded to + indicate specific processing of the option [11]; for the Home Address + option, these three bits are set to 110. This indicates the + following processing requirements: + + o Any IPv6 node that does not recognize the Option Type must discard + the packet, and if the packet's Destination Address was not a + multicast address, return an ICMP Parameter Problem, Code 2, + message to the packet's Source Address. The Pointer field in the + ICMP message SHOULD point at the Option Type field. Otherwise, + for multicast addresses, the ICMP message MUST NOT be sent. + + o The data within the option cannot change en route to the packet's + final destination. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 52] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Home Address option MUST be placed as follows: + + o After the routing header, if that header is present + + o Before the Fragment Header, if that header is present + + o Before the AH Header or ESP Header, if either one of those headers + are present + + For each IPv6 packet header, the Home Address Option MUST NOT appear + more than once. However, an encapsulated packet [15] MAY contain a + separate Home Address option associated with each encapsulating IP + header. + + The inclusion of a Home Address destination option in a packet + affects the receiving node's processing of only this single packet. + No state is created or modified in the receiving node as a result of + receiving a Home Address option in a packet. In particular, the + presence of a Home Address option in a received packet MUST NOT alter + the contents of the receiver's Binding Cache and MUST NOT cause any + changes in the routing of subsequent packets sent by this receiving + node. + +6.4. Type 2 Routing Header + + Mobile IPv6 defines a new routing header variant, the type 2 routing + header, to allow the packet to be routed directly from a + correspondent to the mobile node's care-of address. The mobile + node's care-of address is inserted into the IPv6 Destination Address + field. Once the packet arrives at the care-of address, the mobile + node retrieves its home address from the routing header, and this is + used as the final destination address for the packet. + + The new routing header uses a different type than defined for + "regular" IPv6 source routing, enabling firewalls to apply different + rules to source routed packets than to Mobile IPv6. This routing + header type (type 2) is restricted to carry only one IPv6 address. + All IPv6 nodes which process this routing header MUST verify that the + address contained within is the node's own home address in order to + prevent packets from being forwarded outside the node. The IP + address contained in the routing header, since it is the mobile + node's home address, MUST be a unicast routable address. + Furthermore, if the scope of the home address is smaller than the + scope of the care-of address, the mobile node MUST discard the packet + (see Section 4.6). + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 53] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +6.4.1. Format + + The type 2 routing header has the following format: + + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Next Header | Hdr Ext Len=2 | Routing Type=2|Segments Left=1| + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + + + | | + + Home Address + + | | + + + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Next Header + + 8-bit selector. Identifies the type of header immediately + following the routing header. Uses the same values as the IPv6 + Next Header field [11]. + + Hdr Ext Len + + 2 (8-bit unsigned integer); length of the routing header in 8- + octet units, not including the first 8 octets. + + Routing Type + + 2 (8-bit unsigned integer). + + Segments Left + + 1 (8-bit unsigned integer). + + Reserved + + 32-bit reserved field. The value MUST be initialized to zero by + the sender, and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + Home Address + + The Home Address of the destination Mobile Node. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 54] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + For a type 2 routing header, the Hdr Ext Len MUST be 2. The Segments + Left value describes the number of route segments remaining; i.e., + number of explicitly listed intermediate nodes still to be visited + before reaching the final destination. Segments Left MUST be 1. The + ordering rules for extension headers in an IPv6 packet are described + in Section 4.1 of RFC 2460 [11]. The type 2 routing header defined + for Mobile IPv6 follows the same ordering as other routing headers. + If both a type 0 and a type 2 routing header are present, the type 2 + routing header should follow the other routing header. A packet + containing such nested encapsulation should be created as if the + inner (type 2) routing header was constructed first and then treated + as an original packet by the outer (type 0) routing header + construction process. + + In addition, the general procedures defined by IPv6 for routing + headers suggest that a received routing header MAY be automatically + "reversed" to construct a routing header for use in any response + packets sent by upper-layer protocols, if the received packet is + authenticated [6]. This MUST NOT be done automatically for type 2 + routing headers. + +6.5. ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Request Message + + The ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Request message is used by a + mobile node to initiate the dynamic home agent address discovery + mechanism, as described in Section 11.4.1. The mobile node sends the + Home Agent Address Discovery Request message to the Mobile IPv6 + Home-Agents anycast address [16] for its own home subnet prefix. + (Note that the currently defined anycast addresses may not work with + all prefix lengths other than those defined in RFC 2373 [3, 35].) + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Code | Checksum | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Identifier | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Type + + 144 + + Code + + 0 + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 55] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Checksum + + The ICMP checksum [14]. + + Identifier + + An identifier to aid in matching Home Agent Address Discovery + Reply messages to this Home Agent Address Discovery Request + message. + + Reserved + + This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + The Source Address of the Home Agent Address Discovery Request + message packet is typically one of the mobile node's current care-of + addresses. At the time of performing this dynamic home agent address + discovery procedure, it is likely that the mobile node is not + registered with any home agent. Therefore, neither the nature of the + address nor the identity of the mobile node can be established at + this time. The home agent MUST then return the Home Agent Address + Discovery Reply message directly to the Source Address chosen by the + mobile node. + +6.6. ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Reply Message + + The ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Reply message is used by a home + agent to respond to a mobile node that uses the dynamic home agent + address discovery mechanism, as described in Section 10.5. + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Code | Checksum | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Identifier | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + + + . . + . Home Agent Addresses . + . . + + + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 56] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Type + + 145 + + Code + + 0 + + Checksum + + The ICMP checksum [14]. + + Identifier + + The identifier from the invoking Home Agent Address Discovery + Request message. + + Reserved + + This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + Home Agent Addresses + + A list of addresses of home agents on the home link for the mobile + node. The number of addresses presented in the list is indicated + by the remaining length of the IPv6 packet carrying the Home Agent + Address Discovery Reply message. + +6.7. ICMP Mobile Prefix Solicitation Message Format + + The ICMP Mobile Prefix Solicitation Message is sent by a mobile node + to its home agent while it is away from home. The purpose of the + message is to solicit a Mobile Prefix Advertisement from the home + agent, which will allow the mobile node to gather prefix information + about its home network. This information can be used to configure + and update home address(es) according to changes in prefix + information supplied by the home agent. + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Code | Checksum | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Identifier | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 57] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + IP Fields: + + Source Address + + The mobile node's care-of address. + + Destination Address + + The address of the mobile node's home agent. This home agent must + be on the link that the mobile node wishes to learn prefix + information about. + + Hop Limit + + Set to an initial hop limit value, similarly to any other unicast + packet sent by the mobile node. + + Destination Option: + + A Home Address destination option MUST be included. + + ESP header: + + IPsec headers MUST be supported and SHOULD be used as described in + Section 5.4. + + ICMP Fields: + + Type + + 146 + + Code + + 0 + + Checksum + + The ICMP checksum [14]. + + Identifier + + An identifier to aid in matching a future Mobile Prefix + Advertisement to this Mobile Prefix Solicitation. + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 58] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Reserved + + This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + The Mobile Prefix Solicitation messages may have options. These + options MUST use the option format defined in RFC 2461 [12]. This + document does not define any option types for the Mobile Prefix + Solicitation message, but future documents may define new options. + Home agents MUST silently ignore any options they do not recognize + and continue processing the message. + +6.8. ICMP Mobile Prefix Advertisement Message Format + + A home agent will send a Mobile Prefix Advertisement to a mobile node + to distribute prefix information about the home link while the mobile + node is traveling away from the home network. This will occur in + response to a Mobile Prefix Solicitation with an Advertisement, or by + an unsolicited Advertisement sent according to the rules in Section + 10.6. + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Code | Checksum | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Identifier |M|O| Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Options ... + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + IP Fields: + + Source Address + + The home agent's address as the mobile node would expect to see it + (i.e., same network prefix). + + Destination Address + + If this message is a response to a Mobile Prefix Solicitation, + this field contains the Source Address field from that packet. + For unsolicited messages, the mobile node's care-of address SHOULD + be used. Note that unsolicited messages can only be sent if the + mobile node is currently registered with the home agent. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 59] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Routing header: + + A type 2 routing header MUST be included. + + ESP header: + + IPsec headers MUST be supported and SHOULD be used as described in + Section 5.4. + + ICMP Fields: + + Type + + 147 + + Code + + 0 + + Checksum + + The ICMP checksum [14]. + + Identifier + + An identifier to aid in matching this Mobile Prefix Advertisement + to a previous Mobile Prefix Solicitation. + + M + + 1-bit Managed Address Configuration flag. When set, hosts use the + administered (stateful) protocol for address autoconfiguration in + addition to any addresses autoconfigured using stateless address + autoconfiguration. The use of this flag is described in [12, 13]. + + O + + 1-bit Other Stateful Configuration flag. When set, hosts use the + administered (stateful) protocol for autoconfiguration of other + (non-address) information. The use of this flag is described in + [12, 13]. + + Reserved + + This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 60] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Mobile Prefix Advertisement messages may have options. These + options MUST use the option format defined in RFC 2461 [12]. This + document defines one option which may be carried in a Mobile Prefix + Advertisement message, but future documents may define new options. + Mobile nodes MUST silently ignore any options they do not recognize + and continue processing the message. + + Prefix Information + + Each message contains one or more Prefix Information options. + Each option carries the prefix(es) that the mobile node should use + to configure its home address(es). Section 10.6 describes which + prefixes should be advertised to the mobile node. + + The Prefix Information option is defined in Section 4.6.2 of RFC + 2461 [12], with modifications defined in Section 7.2 of this + specification. The home agent MUST use this modified Prefix + Information option to send home network prefixes as defined in + Section 10.6.1. + + If the Advertisement is sent in response to a Mobile Prefix + Solicitation, the home agent MUST copy the Identifier value from that + message into the Identifier field of the Advertisement. + + The home agent MUST NOT send more than one Mobile Prefix + Advertisement message per second to any mobile node. + + The M and O bits MUST be cleared if the Home Agent DHCPv6 support is + not provided. If such support is provided then they are set in + concert with the home network's administrative settings. + +7. Modifications to IPv6 Neighbor Discovery + +7.1. Modified Router Advertisement Message Format + + Mobile IPv6 modifies the format of the Router Advertisement message + [12] by the addition of a single flag bit to indicate that the router + sending the Advertisement message is serving as a home agent on this + link. The format of the Router Advertisement message is as follows: + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 61] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Code | Checksum | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Cur Hop Limit |M|O|H| Reserved| Router Lifetime | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Reachable Time | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Retrans Timer | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Options ... + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- + + This format represents the following changes over that originally + specified for Neighbor Discovery [12]: + + Home Agent (H) + + The Home Agent (H) bit is set in a Router Advertisement to + indicate that the router sending this Router Advertisement is also + functioning as a Mobile IPv6 home agent on this link. + + Reserved + + Reduced from a 6-bit field to a 5-bit field to account for the + addition of the above bit. + +7.2. Modified Prefix Information Option Format + + Mobile IPv6 requires knowledge of a router's global address in + building a Home Agents List as part of the dynamic home agent address + discovery mechanism. + + However, Neighbor Discovery [12] only advertises a router's link- + local address, by requiring this address to be used as the IP Source + Address of each Router Advertisement. + + Mobile IPv6 extends Neighbor Discovery to allow a router to advertise + its global address, by the addition of a single flag bit in the + format of a Prefix Information option for use in Router Advertisement + messages. The format of the Prefix Information option is as follows: + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 62] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Length | Prefix Length |L|A|R|Reserved1| + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Valid Lifetime | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Preferred Lifetime | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Reserved2 | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + + + + | | + + Prefix + + | | + + + + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + This format represents the following changes over that originally + specified for Neighbor Discovery [12]: + + Router Address (R) + + 1-bit router address flag. When set, indicates that the Prefix + field contains a complete IP address assigned to the sending + router. The indicated prefix is the first Prefix Length bits of + the Prefix field. The router IP address has the same scope and + conforms to the same lifetime values as the advertised prefix. + This use of the Prefix field is compatible with its use in + advertising the prefix itself, since Prefix Advertisement uses + only the leading bits. Interpretation of this flag bit is thus + independent of the processing required for the On-Link (L) and + Autonomous Address-Configuration (A) flag bits. + + Reserved1 + + Reduced from a 6-bit field to a 5-bit field to account for the + addition of the above bit. + + In a Router Advertisement, a home agent MUST, and all other routers + MAY, include at least one Prefix Information option with the Router + Address (R) bit set. Neighbor Discovery specifies that, if including + all options in a Router Advertisement causes the size of the + Advertisement to exceed the link MTU, multiple Advertisements can be + sent, each containing a subset of the options [12]. Also, when + sending unsolicited multicast Router Advertisements more frequently + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 63] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + than the limit specified in RFC 2461 [12], the sending router need + not include all options in each of these Advertisements. However, in + both of these cases the router SHOULD include at least one Prefix + Information option with the Router Address (R) bit set in each such + advertisement, if this bit is set in some advertisement sent by the + router. + + In addition, the following requirement can assist mobile nodes in + movement detection. Barring changes in the prefixes for the link, + routers that send multiple Router Advertisements with the Router + Address (R) bit set in some of the included Prefix Information + options SHOULD provide at least one option and router address which + stays the same in all of the Advertisements. + +7.3. New Advertisement Interval Option Format + + Mobile IPv6 defines a new Advertisement Interval option, used in + Router Advertisement messages to advertise the interval at which the + sending router sends unsolicited multicast Router Advertisements. + The format of the Advertisement Interval option is as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Length | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Advertisement Interval | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Type + + 7 + + Length + + 8-bit unsigned integer. The length of the option (including the + type and length fields) is in units of 8 octets. The value of + this field MUST be 1. + + Reserved + + This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 64] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Advertisement Interval + + 32-bit unsigned integer. The maximum time, in milliseconds, + between successive unsolicited Router Advertisement messages sent + by this router on this network interface. Using the conceptual + router configuration variables defined by Neighbor Discovery [12], + this field MUST be equal to the value MaxRtrAdvInterval, expressed + in milliseconds. + + Routers MAY include this option in their Router Advertisements. A + mobile node receiving a Router Advertisement containing this option + SHOULD utilize the specified Advertisement Interval for that router + in its movement detection algorithm, as described in Section 11.5.1. + + This option MUST be silently ignored for other Neighbor Discovery + messages. + +7.4. New Home Agent Information Option Format + + Mobile IPv6 defines a new Home Agent Information option, used in + Router Advertisements sent by a home agent to advertise information + specific to this router's functionality as a home agent. The format + of the Home Agent Information option is as follows: + + 0 1 2 3 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Length | Reserved | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Home Agent Preference | Home Agent Lifetime | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Type + + 8 + + Length + + 8-bit unsigned integer. The length of the option (including the + type and length fields) in units of 8 octets. The value of this + field MUST be 1. + + Reserved + + This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero by the + sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 65] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Home Agent Preference + + 16-bit unsigned integer. The preference for the home agent + sending this Router Advertisement, for use in ordering the + addresses returned to a mobile node in the Home Agent Addresses + field of a Home Agent Address Discovery Reply message. Higher + values mean more preferable. If this option is not included in a + Router Advertisement in which the Home Agent (H) bit is set, the + preference value for this home agent MUST be considered to be 0. + Greater values indicate a more preferable home agent than lower + values. + + The manual configuration of the Home Agent Preference value is + described in Section 8.4. In addition, the sending home agent MAY + dynamically set the Home Agent Preference value, for example + basing it on the number of mobile nodes it is currently serving or + on its remaining resources for serving additional mobile nodes; + such dynamic settings are beyond the scope of this document. Any + such dynamic setting of the Home Agent Preference, however, MUST + set the preference appropriately, relative to the default Home + Agent Preference value of 0 that may be in use by some home agents + on this link (i.e., a home agent not including a Home Agent + Information option in its Router Advertisements will be considered + to have a Home Agent Preference value of 0). + + Home Agent Lifetime + + 16-bit unsigned integer. The lifetime associated with the home + agent in units of seconds. The default value is the same as the + Router Lifetime, as specified in the main body of the Router + Advertisement. The maximum value corresponds to 18.2 hours. A + value of 0 MUST NOT be used. The Home Agent Lifetime applies only + to this router's usefulness as a home agent; it does not apply to + information contained in other message fields or options. + + Home agents MAY include this option in their Router Advertisements. + This option MUST NOT be included in a Router Advertisement in which + the Home Agent (H) bit (see Section 7.1) is not set. If this option + is not included in a Router Advertisement in which the Home Agent (H) + bit is set, the lifetime for this home agent MUST be considered to be + the same as the Router Lifetime in the Router Advertisement. If + multiple Advertisements are being sent instead of a single larger + unsolicited multicast Advertisement, all of the multiple + Advertisements with the Router Address (R) bit set MUST include this + option with the same contents, otherwise this option MUST be omitted + from all Advertisements. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 66] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + This option MUST be silently ignored for other Neighbor Discovery + messages. + + If both the Home Agent Preference and Home Agent Lifetime are set to + their default values specified above, this option SHOULD NOT be + included in the Router Advertisement messages sent by this home + agent. + +7.5. Changes to Sending Router Advertisements + + The Neighbor Discovery protocol specification [12] limits routers to + a minimum interval of 3 seconds between sending unsolicited multicast + Router Advertisement messages from any given network interface + (limited by MinRtrAdvInterval and MaxRtrAdvInterval), stating that: + + "Routers generate Router Advertisements frequently enough that + hosts will learn of their presence within a few minutes, but not + frequently enough to rely on an absence of advertisements to + detect router failure; a separate Neighbor Unreachability + Detection algorithm provides failure detection." + + This limitation, however, is not suitable to providing timely + movement detection for mobile nodes. Mobile nodes detect their own + movement by learning the presence of new routers as the mobile node + moves into wireless transmission range of them (or physically + connects to a new wired network), and by learning that previous + routers are no longer reachable. Mobile nodes MUST be able to + quickly detect when they move to a link served by a new router, so + that they can acquire a new care-of address and send Binding Updates + to register this care-of address with their home agent and to notify + correspondent nodes as needed. + + One method which can provide for faster movement detection, is to + increase the rate at which unsolicited Router Advertisements are + sent. Mobile IPv6 relaxes this limit such that routers MAY send + unsolicited multicast Router Advertisements more frequently. This + method can be applied where the router is expecting to provide + service to visiting mobile nodes (e.g., wireless network interfaces), + or on which it is serving as a home agent to one or more mobile nodes + (who may return home and need to hear its Advertisements). + + Routers supporting mobility SHOULD be able to be configured with a + smaller MinRtrAdvInterval value and MaxRtrAdvInterval value to allow + sending of unsolicited multicast Router Advertisements more often. + The minimum allowed values are: + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 67] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o MinRtrAdvInterval 0.03 seconds + + o MaxRtrAdvInterval 0.07 seconds + + In the case where the minimum intervals and delays are used, the mean + time between unsolicited multicast router advertisements is 50 ms. + Use of these modified limits MUST be configurable (see also the + configuration variable MinDelayBetweenRas in Section 13 which may + also have to be modified accordingly). Systems where these values + are available MUST NOT default to them, and SHOULD default to values + specified in RFC 2461. Knowledge of the type of network interface + and operating environment SHOULD be taken into account in configuring + these limits for each network interface. This is important with some + wireless links, where increasing the frequency of multicast beacons + can cause considerable overhead. Routers SHOULD adhere to the + intervals specified in RFC 2461 [12], if this overhead is likely to + cause service degradation. + + Additionally, the possible low values of MaxRtrAdvInterval may cause + some problems with movement detection in some mobile nodes. To + ensure that this is not a problem, Routers SHOULD add 20 ms to any + Advertisement Intervals sent in RAs, which are below 200 ms, in order + to account for scheduling granularities on both the MN and the + Router. + + Note that multicast Router Advertisements are not always required in + certain wireless networks that have limited bandwidth. Mobility + detection or link changes in such networks may be done at lower + layers. Router advertisements in such networks SHOULD be sent only + when solicited. In such networks it SHOULD be possible to disable + unsolicited multicast Router Advertisements on specific interfaces. + The MinRtrAdvInterval and MaxRtrAdvInterval in such a case can be set + to some high values. + + Home agents MUST include the Source Link-Layer Address option in all + Router Advertisements they send. This simplifies the process of + returning home, as discussed in Section 11.5.4. + + Note that according to RFC 2461 [12], AdvDefaultLifetime is by + default based on the value of MaxRtrAdvInterval. AdvDefaultLifetime + is used in the Router Lifetime field of Router Advertisements. Given + that this field is expressed in seconds, a small MaxRtrAdvInterval + value can result in a zero value for this field. To prevent this, + routers SHOULD keep AdvDefaultLifetime in at least one second, even + if the use of MaxRtrAdvInterval would result in a smaller value. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 68] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +8. Requirements for Types of IPv6 Nodes + + Mobile IPv6 places some special requirements on the functions + provided by different types of IPv6 nodes. This section summarizes + those requirements, identifying the functionality each requirement is + intended to support. + + The requirements are set for the following groups of nodes: + + o All IPv6 nodes. + + o All IPv6 nodes with support for route optimization. + + o All IPv6 routers. + + o All Mobile IPv6 home agents. + + o All Mobile IPv6 mobile nodes. + + It is outside the scope of this specification to specify which of + these groups are mandatory in IPv6. We only describe what is + mandatory for a node that supports, for instance, route optimization. + Other specifications are expected to define the extent of IPv6. + +8.1. All IPv6 Nodes + + Any IPv6 node may at any time be a correspondent node of a mobile + node, either sending a packet to a mobile node or receiving a packet + from a mobile node. There are no Mobile IPv6 specific MUST + requirements for such nodes, and basic IPv6 techniques are + sufficient. If a mobile node attempts to set up route optimization + with a node with only basic IPv6 support, an ICMP error will signal + that the node does not support such optimizations (Section 11.3.5), + and communications will flow through the home agent. + + An IPv6 node MUST NOT support the Home Address destination option, + type 2 routing header, or the Mobility Header unless it fully + supports the requirements listed in the next sections for either + route optimization, mobile node, or home agent functionality. + +8.2. IPv6 Nodes with Support for Route Optimization + + Nodes that implement route optimization are a subset of all IPv6 + nodes on the Internet. The ability of a correspondent node to + participate in route optimization is essential for the efficient + operation of the IPv6 Internet, for the following reasons: + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 69] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o Avoidance of congestion in the home network, and enabling the use + of lower-performance home agent equipment even for supporting + thousands of mobile nodes. + + o Reduced network load across the entire Internet, as mobile devices + begin to predominate. + + o Reduction of jitter and latency for the communications. + + o Greater likelihood of success for QoS signaling as tunneling is + avoided and, again, fewer sources of congestion. + + o Improved robustness against network partitions, congestion, and + other problems, since fewer routing path segments are traversed. + + These effects combine to enable much better performance and + robustness for communications between mobile nodes and IPv6 + correspondent nodes. Route optimization introduces a small amount of + additional state for the peers, some additional messaging, and up to + 1.5 roundtrip delays before it can be turned on. However, it is + believed that the benefits far outweigh the costs in most cases. + Section 11.3.1 discusses how mobile nodes may avoid route + optimization for some of the remaining cases, such as very short-term + communications. + + The following requirements apply to all correspondent nodes that + support route optimization: + + o The node MUST be able to validate a Home Address option using an + existing Binding Cache entry, as described in Section 9.3.1. + + o The node MUST be able to insert a type 2 routing header into + packets to be sent to a mobile node, as described in Section + 9.3.2. + + o Unless the correspondent node is also acting as a mobile node, it + MUST ignore type 2 routing headers and silently discard all + packets that it has received with such headers. + + o The node SHOULD be able to interpret ICMP messages as described in + Section 9.3.4. + + o The node MUST be able to send Binding Error messages as described + in Section 9.3.3. + + o The node MUST be able to process Mobility Headers as described in + Section 9.2. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 70] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The node MUST be able to participate in a return routability + procedure (Section 9.4). + + o The node MUST be able to process Binding Update messages (Section + 9.5). + + o The node MUST be able to return a Binding Acknowledgement (Section + 9.5.4). + + o The node MUST be able to maintain a Binding Cache of the bindings + received in accepted Binding Updates, as described in Section 9.1 + and Section 9.6. + + o The node SHOULD allow route optimization to be administratively + enabled or disabled. The default SHOULD be enabled. + +8.3. All IPv6 Routers + + All IPv6 routers, even those not serving as a home agent for Mobile + IPv6, have an effect on how well mobile nodes can communicate: + + o Every IPv6 router SHOULD be able to send an Advertisement Interval + option (Section 7.3) in each of its Router Advertisements [12], to + aid movement detection by mobile nodes (as in Section 11.5.1). + The use of this option in Router Advertisements SHOULD be + configurable. + + o Every IPv6 router SHOULD be able to support sending unsolicited + multicast Router Advertisements at the faster rate described in + Section 7.5. If the router supports a faster rate, the used rate + MUST be configurable. + + o Each router SHOULD include at least one prefix with the Router + Address (R) bit set and with its full IP address in its Router + Advertisements (as described in Section 7.2). + + o Routers supporting filtering packets with routing headers SHOULD + support different rules for type 0 and type 2 routing headers (see + Section 6.4) so that filtering of source routed packets (type 0) + will not necessarily limit Mobile IPv6 traffic which is delivered + via type 2 routing headers. + +8.4. IPv6 Home Agents + + In order for a mobile node to operate correctly while away from home, + at least one IPv6 router on the mobile node's home link must function + as a home agent for the mobile node. The following additional + requirements apply to all IPv6 routers that serve as a home agent: + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 71] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o Every home agent MUST be able to maintain an entry in its Binding + Cache for each mobile node for which it is serving as the home + agent (Section 10.1 and Section 10.3.1). + + o Every home agent MUST be able to intercept packets (using proxy + Neighbor Discovery [12]) addressed to a mobile node for which it + is currently serving as the home agent, on that mobile node's home + link, while the mobile node is away from home (Section 10.4.1). + + o Every home agent MUST be able to encapsulate [15] such intercepted + packets in order to tunnel them to the primary care-of address for + the mobile node indicated in its binding in the home agent's + Binding Cache (Section 10.4.2). + + o Every home agent MUST support decapsulating [15] reverse tunneled + packets sent to it from a mobile node's home address. Every home + agent MUST also check that the source address in the tunneled + packets corresponds to the currently registered location of the + mobile node (Section 10.4.5). + + o The node MUST be able to process Mobility Headers as described in + Section 10.2. + + o Every home agent MUST be able to return a Binding Acknowledgement + in response to a Binding Update (Section 10.3.1). + + o Every home agent MUST maintain a separate Home Agents List for + each link on which it is serving as a home agent, as described in + Section 10.1 and Section 10.5.1. + + o Every home agent MUST be able to accept packets addressed to the + Mobile IPv6 Home-Agents anycast address [16] for the subnet on + which it is serving as a home agent, and MUST be able to + participate in dynamic home agent address discovery (Section + 10.5). + + o Every home agent SHOULD support a configuration mechanism to allow + a system administrator to manually set the value to be sent by + this home agent in the Home Agent Preference field of the Home + Agent Information Option in Router Advertisements that it sends + (Section 7.4). + + o Every home agent SHOULD support sending ICMP Mobile Prefix + Advertisements (Section 6.8), and SHOULD respond to Mobile Prefix + Solicitations (Section 6.7). If supported, this behavior MUST be + configurable, so that home agents can be configured to avoid + sending such Prefix Advertisements according to the needs of the + network administration in the home domain. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 72] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o Every home agent MUST support IPsec ESP for protection of packets + belonging to the return routability procedure (Section 10.4.6). + + o Every home agent SHOULD support the multicast group membership + control protocols as described in Section 10.4.3. If this support + is provided, the home agent MUST be capable of using it to + determine which multicast data packets to forward via the tunnel + to the mobile node. + + o Home agents MAY support stateful address autoconfiguration for + mobile nodes as described in Section 10.4.4. + +8.5. IPv6 Mobile Nodes + + Finally, the following requirements apply to all IPv6 nodes capable + of functioning as mobile nodes: + + o The node MUST maintain a Binding Update List (Section 11.1). + + o The node MUST support sending packets containing a Home Address + option (Section 11.3.1), and follow the required IPsec interaction + (Section 11.3.2). + + o The node MUST be able to perform IPv6 encapsulation and + decapsulation [15]. + + o The node MUST be able to process type 2 routing header as defined + in Section 6.4 and Section 11.3.3. + + o The node MUST support receiving a Binding Error message (Section + 11.3.6). + + o The node MUST support receiving ICMP errors (Section 11.3.5). + + o The node MUST support movement detection, care-of address + formation, and returning home (Section 11.5). + + o The node MUST be able to process Mobility Headers as described in + Section 11.2. + + o The node MUST support the return routability procedure (Section + 11.6). + + o The node MUST be able to send Binding Updates, as specified in + Section 11.7.1 and Section 11.7.2. + + o The node MUST be able to receive and process Binding + Acknowledgements, as specified in Section 11.7.3. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 73] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The node MUST support receiving a Binding Refresh Request (Section + 6.1.2), by responding with a Binding Update. + + o The node MUST support receiving Mobile Prefix Advertisements + (Section 11.4.3) and reconfiguring its home address based on the + prefix information contained therein. + + o The node SHOULD support use of the dynamic home agent address + discovery mechanism, as described in Section 11.4.1. + + o The node MUST allow route optimization to be administratively + enabled or disabled. The default SHOULD be enabled. + + o The node MAY support the multicast address listener part of a + multicast group membership protocol as described in Section + 11.3.4. If this support is provided, the mobile node MUST be able + to receive tunneled multicast packets from the home agent. + + o The node MAY support stateful address autoconfiguration mechanisms + such as DHCPv6 [29] on the interface represented by the tunnel to + the home agent. + +9. Correspondent Node Operation + +9.1. Conceptual Data Structures + + IPv6 nodes with route optimization support maintain a Binding Cache + of bindings for other nodes. A separate Binding Cache SHOULD be + maintained by each IPv6 node for each of its unicast routable + addresses. The Binding Cache MAY be implemented in any manner + consistent with the external behavior described in this document, for + example by being combined with the node's Destination Cache as + maintained by Neighbor Discovery [12]. When sending a packet, the + Binding Cache is searched before the Neighbor Discovery conceptual + Destination Cache [12]. + + Each Binding Cache entry conceptually contains the following fields: + + o The home address of the mobile node for which this is the Binding + Cache entry. This field is used as the key for searching the + Binding Cache for the destination address of a packet being sent. + + o The care-of address for the mobile node indicated by the home + address field in this Binding Cache entry. + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 74] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o A lifetime value, indicating the remaining lifetime for this + Binding Cache entry. The lifetime value is initialized from the + Lifetime field in the Binding Update that created or last modified + this Binding Cache entry. + + o A flag indicating whether or not this Binding Cache entry is a + home registration entry (applicable only on nodes which support + home agent functionality). + + o The maximum value of the Sequence Number field received in + previous Binding Updates for this home address. The Sequence + Number field is 16 bits long. Sequence Number values MUST be + compared modulo 2**16 as explained in Section 9.5.1. + + o Usage information for this Binding Cache entry. This is needed to + implement the cache replacement policy in use in the Binding + Cache. Recent use of a cache entry also serves as an indication + that a Binding Refresh Request should be sent when the lifetime of + this entry nears expiration. + + Binding Cache entries not marked as home registrations MAY be + replaced at any time by any reasonable local cache replacement policy + but SHOULD NOT be unnecessarily deleted. The Binding Cache for any + one of a node's IPv6 addresses may contain at most one entry for each + mobile node home address. The contents of a node's Binding Cache + MUST NOT be changed in response to a Home Address option in a + received packet. + +9.2. Processing Mobility Headers + + Mobility Header processing MUST observe the following rules: + + o The checksum must be verified as per Section 6.1. Otherwise, the + node MUST silently discard the message. + + o The MH Type field MUST have a known value (Section 6.1.1). + Otherwise, the node MUST discard the message and issue a Binding + Error message as described in Section 9.3.3, with Status field set + to 2 (unrecognized MH Type value). + + o The Payload Proto field MUST be IPPROTO_NONE (59 decimal). + Otherwise, the node MUST discard the message and SHOULD send ICMP + Parameter Problem, Code 0, directly to the Source Address of the + packet as specified in RFC 2463 [14]. Thus no Binding Cache + information is used in sending the ICMP message. The Pointer + field in the ICMP message SHOULD point at the Payload Proto field. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 75] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The Header Len field in the Mobility Header MUST NOT be less than + the length specified for this particular type of message in + Section 6.1. Otherwise, the node MUST discard the message and + SHOULD send ICMP Parameter Problem, Code 0, directly to the Source + Address of the packet as specified in RFC 2463 [14]. (The Binding + Cache information is again not used.) The Pointer field in the + ICMP message SHOULD point at the Header Len field. + + Subsequent checks depend on the particular Mobility Header. + +9.3. Packet Processing + + This section describes how the correspondent node sends packets to + the mobile node, and receives packets from it. + +9.3.1. Receiving Packets with Home Address Option + + Packets containing a Home Address option MUST be dropped if the given + home address is not a unicast routable address. + + Mobile nodes can include a Home Address destination option in a + packet if they believe the correspondent node has a Binding Cache + entry for the home address of a mobile node. Packets containing a + Home Address option MUST be dropped if there is no corresponding + Binding Cache entry. A corresponding Binding Cache entry MUST have + the same home address as appears in the Home Address destination + option, and the currently registered care-of address MUST be equal to + the source address of the packet. These tests MUST NOT be done for + packets that contain a Home Address option and a Binding Update. + + If the packet is dropped due the above tests, the correspondent node + MUST send the Binding Error message as described in Section 9.3.3. + The Status field in this message should be set to 1 (unknown binding + for Home Address destination option). + + The correspondent node MUST process the option in a manner consistent + with exchanging the Home Address field from the Home Address option + into the IPv6 header and replacing the original value of the Source + Address field there. After all IPv6 options have been processed, it + MUST be possible for upper layers to process the packet without the + knowledge that it came originally from a care-of address or that a + Home Address option was used. + + The use of IPsec Authentication Header (AH) for the Home Address + option is not required, except that if the IPv6 header of a packet is + covered by AH, then the authentication MUST also cover the Home + Address option; this coverage is achieved automatically by the + definition of the Option Type code for the Home Address option, since + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 76] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + it indicates that the data within the option cannot change en route + to the packet's final destination, and thus the option is included in + the AH computation. By requiring that any authentication of the IPv6 + header also cover the Home Address option, the security of the Source + Address field in the IPv6 header is not compromised by the presence + of a Home Address option. + + When attempting to verify AH authentication data in a packet that + contains a Home Address option, the receiving node MUST calculate the + AH authentication data as if the following were true: The Home + Address option contains the care-of address, and the source IPv6 + address field of the IPv6 header contains the home address. This + conforms with the calculation specified in Section 11.3.2. + +9.3.2. Sending Packets to a Mobile Node + + Before sending any packet, the sending node SHOULD examine its + Binding Cache for an entry for the destination address to which the + packet is being sent. If the sending node has a Binding Cache entry + for this address, the sending node SHOULD use a type 2 routing header + to route the packet to this mobile node (the destination node) by way + of its care-of address. However, the sending node MUST not do this + in the following cases: + + o When sending an IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [12] packet. + + o Where otherwise noted in Section 6.1. + + When calculating authentication data in a packet that contains a type + 2 routing header, the correspondent node MUST calculate the AH + authentication data as if the following were true: The routing header + contains the care-of address, the destination IPv6 address field of + the IPv6 header contains the home address, and the Segments Left + field is zero. The IPsec Security Policy Database lookup MUST based + on the mobile node's home address. + + For instance, assuming there are no additional routing headers in + this packet beyond those needed by Mobile IPv6, the correspondent + node could set the fields in the packet's IPv6 header and routing + header as follows: + + o The Destination Address in the packet's IPv6 header is set to the + mobile node's home address (the original destination address to + which the packet was being sent). + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 77] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The routing header is initialized to contain a single route + segment, containing the mobile node's care-of address copied from + the Binding Cache entry. The Segments Left field is, however, + temporarily set to zero. + + The IP layer will insert the routing header before performing any + necessary IPsec processing. Once all IPsec processing has been + performed, the node swaps the IPv6 destination field with the Home + Address field in the routing header, sets the Segments Left field to + one, and sends the packet. This ensures the AH calculation is done + on the packet in the form it will have on the receiver after + advancing the routing header. + + Following the definition of a type 2 routing header in Section 6.4, + this packet will be routed to the mobile node's care-of address, + where it will be delivered to the mobile node (the mobile node has + associated the care-of address with its network interface). + + Note that following the above conceptual model in an implementation + creates some additional requirements for path MTU discovery since the + layer that decides the packet size (e.g., TCP and applications using + UDP) needs to be aware of the size of the headers added by the IP + layer on the sending node. + + If, instead, the sending node has no Binding Cache entry for the + destination address to which the packet is being sent, the sending + node simply sends the packet normally, with no routing header. If + the destination node is not a mobile node (or is a mobile node that + is currently at home), the packet will be delivered directly to this + node and processed normally by it. If, however, the destination node + is a mobile node that is currently away from home, the packet will be + intercepted by the mobile node's home agent and tunneled to the + mobile node's current primary care-of address. + +9.3.3. Sending Binding Error Messages + + Section 9.2 and Section 9.3.1 describe error conditions that lead to + a need to send a Binding Error message. + + A Binding Error message is sent directly to the address that appeared + in the IPv6 Source Address field of the offending packet. If the + Source Address field does not contain a unicast address, the Binding + Error message MUST NOT be sent. + + The Home Address field in the Binding Error message MUST be copied + from the Home Address field in the Home Address destination option of + the offending packet, or set to the unspecified address if no such + option appeared in the packet. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 78] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Note that the IPv6 Source Address and Home Address field values + discussed above are the values from the wire, i.e., before any + modifications possibly performed as specified in Section 9.3.1. + + Binding Error messages SHOULD be subject to rate limiting in the same + manner as is done for ICMPv6 messages [14]. + +9.3.4. Receiving ICMP Error Messages + + When the correspondent node has a Binding Cache entry for a mobile + node, all traffic destined to the mobile node goes directly to the + current care-of address of the mobile node using a routing header. + Any ICMP error message caused by packets on their way to the care-of + address will be returned in the normal manner to the correspondent + node. + + On the other hand, if the correspondent node has no Binding Cache + entry for the mobile node, the packet will be routed through the + mobile node's home link. Any ICMP error message caused by the packet + on its way to the mobile node while in the tunnel, will be + transmitted to the mobile node's home agent. By the definition of + IPv6 encapsulation [15], the home agent MUST relay certain ICMP error + messages back to the original sender of the packet, which in this + case is the correspondent node. + + Thus, in all cases, any meaningful ICMP error messages caused by + packets from a correspondent node to a mobile node will be returned + to the correspondent node. If the correspondent node receives + persistent ICMP Destination Unreachable messages after sending + packets to a mobile node based on an entry in its Binding Cache, the + correspondent node SHOULD delete this Binding Cache entry. Note that + if the mobile node continues to send packets with the Home Address + destination option to this correspondent node, they will be dropped + due to the lack of a binding. For this reason it is important that + only persistent ICMP messages lead to the deletion of the Binding + Cache entry. + +9.4. Return Routability Procedure + + This subsection specifies actions taken by a correspondent node + during the return routability procedure. + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 79] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +9.4.1. Receiving Home Test Init Messages + + Upon receiving a Home Test Init message, the correspondent node + verifies the following: + + o The packet MUST NOT include a Home Address destination option. + + Any packet carrying a Home Test Init message which fails to satisfy + all of these tests MUST be silently ignored. + + Otherwise, in preparation for sending the corresponding Home Test + Message, the correspondent node checks that it has the necessary + material to engage in a return routability procedure, as specified in + Section 5.2. The correspondent node MUST have a secret Kcn and a + nonce. If it does not have this material yet, it MUST produce it + before continuing with the return routability procedure. + + Section 9.4.3 specifies further processing. + +9.4.2. Receiving Care-of Test Init Messages + + Upon receiving a Care-of Test Init message, the correspondent node + verifies the following: + + o The packet MUST NOT include a Home Address destination option. + + Any packet carrying a Care-of Test Init message which fails to + satisfy all of these tests MUST be silently ignored. + + Otherwise, in preparation for sending the corresponding Care-of Test + Message, the correspondent node checks that it has the necessary + material to engage in a return routability procedure in the manner + described in Section 9.4.1. + + Section 9.4.4 specifies further processing. + +9.4.3. Sending Home Test Messages + + The correspondent node creates a home keygen token and uses the + current nonce index as the Home Nonce Index. It then creates a Home + Test message (Section 6.1.5) and sends it to the mobile node at the + latter's home address. + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 80] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +9.4.4. Sending Care-of Test Messages + + The correspondent node creates a care-of keygen token and uses the + current nonce index as the Care-of Nonce Index. It then creates a + Care-of Test message (Section 6.1.6) and sends it to the mobile node + at the latter's care-of address. + +9.5. Processing Bindings + + This section explains how the correspondent node processes messages + related to bindings. These messages are: + + o Binding Update + + o Binding Refresh Request + + o Binding Acknowledgement + + o Binding Error + +9.5.1. Receiving Binding Updates + + Before accepting a Binding Update, the receiving node MUST validate + the Binding Update according to the following tests: + + o The packet MUST contain a unicast routable home address, either in + the Home Address option or in the Source Address, if the Home + Address option is not present. + + o The Sequence Number field in the Binding Update is greater than + the Sequence Number received in the previous valid Binding Update + for this home address, if any. + + If the receiving node has no Binding Cache entry for the indicated + home address, it MUST accept any Sequence Number value in a received + Binding Update from this mobile node. + + This Sequence Number comparison MUST be performed modulo 2**16, i.e., + the number is a free running counter represented modulo 65536. A + Sequence Number in a received Binding Update is considered less than + or equal to the last received number if its value lies in the range + of the last received number and the preceding 32768 values, + inclusive. For example, if the last received sequence number was 15, + then messages with sequence numbers 0 through 15, as well as 32783 + through 65535, would be considered less than or equal. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 81] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + When the Home Registration (H) bit is not set, the following are also + required: + + o A Nonce Indices mobility option MUST be present, and the Home and + Care-of Nonce Index values in this option MUST be recent enough to + be recognized by the correspondent node. (Care-of Nonce Index + values are not inspected for requests to delete a binding.) + + o The correspondent node MUST re-generate the home keygen token and + the care-of keygen token from the information contained in the + packet. It then generates the binding management key Kbm and uses + it to verify the authenticator field in the Binding Update as + specified in Section 6.1.7. + + o The Binding Authorization Data mobility option MUST be present, + and its contents MUST satisfy rules presented in Section 5.2.6. + Note that a care-of address different from the Source Address MAY + have been specified by including an Alternate Care-of Address + mobility option in the Binding Update. When such a message is + received and the return routability procedure is used as an + authorization method, the correspondent node MUST verify the + authenticator by using the address within the Alternate Care-of + Address in the calculations. + + o The Binding Authorization Data mobility option MUST be the last + option and MUST NOT have trailing padding. + + If the Home Registration (H) bit is set, the Nonce Indices mobility + option MUST NOT be present. + + If the mobile node sends a sequence number which is not greater than + the sequence number from the last valid Binding Update for this home + address, then the receiving node MUST send back a Binding + Acknowledgement with status code 135, and the last accepted sequence + number in the Sequence Number field of the Binding Acknowledgement. + + If a binding already exists for the given home address and the home + registration flag has a different value than the Home Registration + (H) bit in the Binding Update, then the receiving node MUST send back + a Binding Acknowledgement with status code 139 (registration type + change disallowed). The home registration flag stored in the Binding + Cache entry MUST NOT be changed. + + If the receiving node no longer recognizes the Home Nonce Index + value, Care-of Nonce Index value, or both values from the Binding + Update, then the receiving node MUST send back a Binding + Acknowledgement with status code 136, 137, or 138, respectively. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 82] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Packets carrying Binding Updates that fail to satisfy all of these + tests for any reason other than insufficiency of the Sequence Number, + registration type change, or expired nonce index values, MUST be + silently discarded. + + If the Binding Update is valid according to the tests above, then the + Binding Update is processed further as follows: + + o The Sequence Number value received from a mobile node in a Binding + Update is stored by the receiving node in its Binding Cache entry + for the given home address. + + o If the Lifetime specified in the Binding Update is nonzero and the + specified care-of address is not equal to the home address for the + binding, then this is a request to cache a binding for the home + address. If the Home Registration (H) bit is set in the Binding + Update, the Binding Update is processed according to the procedure + specified in Section 10.3.1; otherwise, it is processed according + to the procedure specified in Section 9.5.2. + + o If the Lifetime specified in the Binding Update is zero or the + specified care-of address matches the home address for the + binding, then this is a request to delete the cached binding for + the home address. In this case, the Binding Update MUST include a + valid home nonce index, and the care-of nonce index MUST be + ignored by the correspondent node. The generation of the binding + management key depends then exclusively on the home keygen token + (Section 5.2.5). If the Home Registration (H) bit is set in the + Binding Update, the Binding Update is processed according to the + procedure specified in Section 10.3.2; otherwise, it is processed + according to the procedure specified in Section 9.5.3. + + The specified care-of address MUST be determined as follows: + + o If the Alternate Care-of Address option is present, the care-of + address is the address in that option. + + o Otherwise, the care-of address is the Source Address field in the + packet's IPv6 header. + + The home address for the binding MUST be determined as follows: + + o If the Home Address destination option is present, the home + address is the address in that option. + + o Otherwise, the home address is the Source Address field in the + packet's IPv6 header. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 83] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +9.5.2. Requests to Cache a Binding + + This section describes the processing of a valid Binding Update that + requests a node to cache a binding, for which the Home Registration + (H) bit is not set in the Binding Update. + + In this case, the receiving node SHOULD create a new entry in its + Binding Cache for this home address, or update its existing Binding + Cache entry for this home address, if such an entry already exists. + The lifetime for the Binding Cache entry is initialized from the + Lifetime field specified in the Binding Update, although this + lifetime MAY be reduced by the node caching the binding; the lifetime + for the Binding Cache entry MUST NOT be greater than the Lifetime + value specified in the Binding Update. Any Binding Cache entry MUST + be deleted after the expiration of its lifetime. + + Note that if the mobile node did not request a Binding + Acknowledgement, then it is not aware of the selected shorter + lifetime. The mobile node may thus use route optimization and send + packets with the Home Address destination option. As discussed in + Section 9.3.1, such packets will be dropped if there is no binding. + This situation is recoverable, but can cause temporary packet loss. + + The correspondent node MAY refuse to accept a new Binding Cache entry + if it does not have sufficient resources. A new entry MAY also be + refused if the correspondent node believes its resources are utilized + more efficiently in some other purpose, such as serving another + mobile node with higher amount of traffic. In both cases the + correspondent node SHOULD return a Binding Acknowledgement with + status value 130. + +9.5.3 Requests to Delete a Binding + + This section describes the processing of a valid Binding Update that + requests a node to delete a binding when the Home Registration (H) + bit is not set in the Binding Update. + + Any existing binding for the given home address MUST be deleted. A + Binding Cache entry for the home address MUST NOT be created in + response to receiving the Binding Update. + + If the Binding Cache entry was created by use of return routability + nonces, the correspondent node MUST ensure that the same nonces are + not used again with the particular home and care-of address. If both + nonces are still valid, the correspondent node has to remember the + particular combination of nonce indexes, addresses, and sequence + number as illegal until at least one of the nonces has become too + old. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 84] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +9.5.4. Sending Binding Acknowledgements + + A Binding Acknowledgement may be sent to indicate receipt of a + Binding Update as follows: + + o If the Binding Update was discarded as described in Section 9.2 or + Section 9.5.1, a Binding Acknowledgement MUST NOT be sent. + Otherwise the treatment depends on the following rules. + + o If the Acknowledge (A) bit set is set in the Binding Update, a + Binding Acknowledgement MUST be sent. Otherwise, the treatment + depends on the below rule. + + o If the node rejects the Binding Update due to an expired nonce + index, sequence number being out of window (Section 9.5.1), or + insufficiency of resources (Section 9.5.2), a Binding + Acknowledgement MUST be sent. If the node accepts the Binding + Update, the Binding Acknowledgement SHOULD NOT be sent. + + If the node accepts the Binding Update and creates or updates an + entry for this binding, the Status field in the Binding + Acknowledgement MUST be set to a value less than 128. Otherwise, the + Status field MUST be set to a value greater than or equal to 128. + Values for the Status field are described in Section 6.1.8 and in the + IANA registry of assigned numbers [19]. + + If the Status field in the Binding Acknowledgement contains the value + 136 (expired home nonce index), 137 (expired care-of nonce index), or + 138 (expired nonces) then the message MUST NOT include the Binding + Authorization Data mobility option. Otherwise, the Binding + Authorization Data mobility option MUST be included, and MUST meet + the specific authentication requirements for Binding Acknowledgements + as defined in Section 5.2. + + If the Source Address field of the IPv6 header that carried the + Binding Update does not contain a unicast address, the Binding + Acknowledgement MUST NOT be sent and the Binding Update packet MUST + be silently discarded. Otherwise, the acknowledgement MUST be sent + to the Source Address. Unlike the treatment of regular packets, this + addressing procedure does not use information from the Binding Cache. + However, a routing header is needed in some cases. If the Source + Address is the home address of the mobile node, i.e., the Binding + Update did not contain a Home Address destination option, then the + Binding Acknowledgement MUST be sent to that address and the routing + header MUST NOT be used. Otherwise, the Binding Acknowledgement MUST + be sent using a type 2 routing header which contains the mobile + node's home address. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 85] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +9.5.5. Sending Binding Refresh Requests + + If a Binding Cache entry being deleted is still in active use when + sending packets to a mobile node, then the next packet sent to the + mobile node will be routed normally to the mobile node's home link. + Communication with the mobile node continues, but the tunneling from + the home network creates additional overhead and latency in + delivering packets to the mobile node. + + If the sender knows that the Binding Cache entry is still in active + use, it MAY send a Binding Refresh Request message to the mobile node + in an attempt to avoid this overhead and latency due to deleting and + recreating the Binding Cache entry. This message is always sent to + the home address of the mobile node. + + The correspondent node MAY retransmit Binding Refresh Request + messages as long as the rate limitation is applied. The + correspondent node MUST stop retransmitting when it receives a + Binding Update. + +9.6. Cache Replacement Policy + + Conceptually, a node maintains a separate timer for each entry in its + Binding Cache. When creating or updating a Binding Cache entry in + response to a received and accepted Binding Update, the node sets the + timer for this entry to the specified Lifetime period. Any entry in + a node's Binding Cache MUST be deleted after the expiration of the + Lifetime specified in the Binding Update from which the entry was + created or last updated. + + Each node's Binding Cache will, by necessity, have a finite size. A + node MAY use any reasonable local policy for managing the space + within its Binding Cache. + + A node MAY choose to drop any entry already in its Binding Cache in + order to make space for a new entry. For example, a "least-recently + used" (LRU) strategy for cache entry replacement among entries should + work well, unless the size of the Binding Cache is substantially + insufficient. When entries are deleted, the correspondent node MUST + follow the rules in Section 5.2.8 in order to guard the return + routability procedure against replay attacks. + + If the node sends a packet to a destination for which it has dropped + the entry from its Binding Cache, the packet will be routed through + the mobile node's home link. The mobile node can detect this and + establish a new binding if necessary. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 86] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + However, if the mobile node believes that the binding still exists, + it may use route optimization and send packets with the Home Address + destination option. This can create temporary packet loss, as + discussed earlier, in the context of binding lifetime reductions + performed by the correspondent node (Section 9.5.2). + +10. Home Agent Operation + +10.1. Conceptual Data Structures + + Each home agent MUST maintain a Binding Cache and Home Agents List. + + The rules for maintaining a Binding Cache are the same for home + agents and correspondent nodes and have already been described in + Section 9.1. + + The Home Agents List is maintained by each home agent, recording + information about each router on the same link that is acting as a + home agent. This list is used by the dynamic home agent address + discovery mechanism. A router is known to be acting as a home agent, + if it sends a Router Advertisement in which the Home Agent (H) bit is + set. When the lifetime for a list entry (defined below) expires, + that entry is removed from the Home Agents List. The Home Agents + List is similar to the Default Router List conceptual data structure + maintained by each host for Neighbor Discovery [12]. The Home Agents + List MAY be implemented in any manner consistent with the external + behavior described in this document. + + Each home agent maintains a separate Home Agents List for each link + on which it is serving as a home agent. A new entry is created or an + existing entry is updated in response to receipt of a valid Router + Advertisement in which the Home Agent (H) bit is set. Each Home + Agents List entry conceptually contains the following fields: + + o The link-local IP address of a home agent on the link. This + address is learned through the Source Address of the Router + Advertisements [12] received from the router. + + o One or more global IP addresses for this home agent. Global + addresses are learned through Prefix Information options with the + Router Address (R) bit set and received in Router Advertisements + from this link-local address. Global addresses for the router in + a Home Agents List entry MUST be deleted once the prefix + associated with that address is no longer valid [12]. + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 87] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The remaining lifetime of this Home Agents List entry. If a Home + Agent Information Option is present in a Router Advertisement + received from a home agent, the lifetime of the Home Agents List + entry representing that home agent is initialized from the Home + Agent Lifetime field in the option (if present); otherwise, the + lifetime is initialized from the Router Lifetime field in the + received Router Advertisement. If Home Agents List entry lifetime + reaches zero, the entry MUST be deleted from the Home Agents List. + + o The preference for this home agent; higher values indicate a more + preferable home agent. The preference value is taken from the + Home Agent Preference field in the received Router Advertisement, + if the Router Advertisement contains a Home Agent Information + Option and is otherwise set to the default value of 0. A home + agent uses this preference in ordering the Home Agents List when + it sends an ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery message. + +10.2. Processing Mobility Headers + + All IPv6 home agents MUST observe the rules described in Section 9.2 + when processing Mobility Headers. + +10.3. Processing Bindings + +10.3.1. Primary Care-of Address Registration + + When a node receives a Binding Update, it MUST validate it and + determine the type of Binding Update according to the steps described + in Section 9.5.1. Furthermore, it MUST authenticate the Binding + Update as described in Section 5.1. An authorization step specific + for the home agent is also needed to ensure that only the right node + can control a particular home address. This is provided through the + home address unequivocally identifying the security association that + must be used. + + This section describes the processing of a valid and authorized + Binding Update when it requests the registration of the mobile node's + primary care-of address. + + To begin processing the Binding Update, the home agent MUST perform + the following sequence of tests: + + o If the node implements only correspondent node functionality, or + has not been configured to act as a home agent, then the node MUST + reject the Binding Update. The node MUST also return a Binding + Acknowledgement to the mobile node, in which the Status field is + set to 131 (home registration not supported). + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 88] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o Else, if the home address for the binding (the Home Address field + in the packet's Home Address option) is not an on-link IPv6 + address with respect to the home agent's current Prefix List, then + the home agent MUST reject the Binding Update and SHOULD return a + Binding Acknowledgement to the mobile node, in which the Status + field is set to 132 (not home subnet). + + o Else, if the home agent chooses to reject the Binding Update for + any other reason (e.g., insufficient resources to serve another + mobile node as a home agent), then the home agent SHOULD return a + Binding Acknowledgement to the mobile node, in which the Status + field is set to an appropriate value to indicate the reason for + the rejection. + + o A Home Address destination option MUST be present in the message. + It MUST be validated as described in Section 9.3.1 with the + following additional rule. The Binding Cache entry existence test + MUST NOT be done for IPsec packets when the Home Address option + contains an address for which the receiving node could act as a + home agent. + + If home agent accepts the Binding Update, it MUST then create a new + entry in its Binding Cache for this mobile node or update its + existing Binding Cache entry, if such an entry already exists. The + Home Address field as received in the Home Address option provides + the home address of the mobile node. + + The home agent MUST mark this Binding Cache entry as a home + registration to indicate that the node is serving as a home agent for + this binding. Binding Cache entries marked as a home registration + MUST be excluded from the normal cache replacement policy used for + the Binding Cache (Section 9.6) and MUST NOT be removed from the + Binding Cache until the expiration of the Lifetime period. + + Unless this home agent already has a binding for the given home + address, the home agent MUST perform Duplicate Address Detection [13] + on the mobile node's home link before returning the Binding + Acknowledgement. This ensures that no other node on the home link + was using the mobile node's home address when the Binding Update + arrived. If this Duplicate Address Detection fails for the given + home address or an associated link local address, then the home agent + MUST reject the complete Binding Update and MUST return a Binding + Acknowledgement to the mobile node, in which the Status field is set + to 134 (Duplicate Address Detection failed). When the home agent + sends a successful Binding Acknowledgement to the mobile node, the + home agent assures to the mobile node that its address(es) will be + kept unique by the home agent for as long as the lifetime was granted + for the binding. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 89] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The specific addresses, which are to be tested before accepting the + Binding Update and later to be defended by performing Duplicate + Address Detection, depend on the setting of the Link-Local Address + Compatibility (L) bit, as follows: + + o L=0: Defend only the given address. Do not derive a link-local + address. + + o L=1: Defend both the given non link-local unicast (home) address + and the derived link-local. The link-local address is derived by + replacing the subnet prefix in the mobile node's home address with + the link-local prefix. + + The lifetime of the Binding Cache entry depends on a number of + factors: + + o The lifetime for the Binding Cache entry MUST NOT be greater than + the Lifetime value specified in the Binding Update. + + o The lifetime for the Binding Cache entry MUST NOT be greater than + the remaining valid lifetime for the subnet prefix in the mobile + node's home address specified with the Binding Update. The + remaining valid lifetime for this prefix is determined by the home + agent based on its own Prefix List entry [12]. + + The remaining preferred lifetime SHOULD NOT have any impact on the + lifetime for the binding cache entry. + + The home agent MUST remove a binding when the valid lifetime of + the prefix associated with it expires. + + o The home agent MAY further decrease the specified lifetime for the + binding, for example based on a local policy. The resulting + lifetime is stored by the home agent in the Binding Cache entry, + and this Binding Cache entry MUST be deleted by the home agent + after the expiration of this lifetime. + + Regardless of the setting of the Acknowledge (A) bit in the Binding + Update, the home agent MUST return a Binding Acknowledgement to the + mobile node constructed as follows: + + o The Status field MUST be set to a value indicating success. The + value 1 (accepted but prefix discovery necessary) MUST be used if + the subnet prefix of the specified home address is deprecated, or + becomes deprecated during the lifetime of the binding, or becomes + invalid at the end of the lifetime. The value 0 MUST be used + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 90] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + otherwise. For the purposes of comparing the binding and prefix + lifetimes, the prefix lifetimes are first converted into units of + four seconds by ignoring the two least significant bits. + + o The Key Management Mobility Capability (K) bit is set if the + following conditions are all fulfilled, and cleared otherwise: + + * The Key Management Mobility Capability (K) bit was set in the + Binding Update. + + * The IPsec security associations between the mobile node and the + home agent have been established dynamically. + + * The home agent has the capability to update its endpoint in the + used key management protocol to the new care-of address every + time it moves. + + Depending on the final value of the bit in the Binding + Acknowledgement, the home agent SHOULD perform the following + actions: + + K = 0 + + Discard key management connections, if any, to the old care-of + address. If the mobile node did not have a binding before + sending this Binding Update, discard the connections to the + home address. + + K = 1 + + Move the peer endpoint of the key management protocol + connection, if any, to the new care-of address. For an IKE + phase 1 connection, this means that any IKE packets sent to the + peer are sent to this address, and packets from this address + with the original ISAKMP cookies are accepted. + + Note that RFC 2408 [8] Section 2.5.3 gives specific rules that + ISAKMP cookies must satisfy: they must depend on specific + parties and can only be generated by the entity itself. Then + it recommends a particular way to do this, namely a hash of IP + addresses. With the K bit set to 1, the recommended + implementation technique does not work directly. To satisfy + the two rules, the specific parties must be treated as the + original IP addresses, not the ones in use at the specific + moment. + + o The Sequence Number field MUST be copied from the Sequence Number + given in the Binding Update. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 91] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The Lifetime field MUST be set to the remaining lifetime for the + binding as set by the home agent in its home registration Binding + Cache entry for the mobile node, as described above. + + o If the home agent stores the Binding Cache entry in nonvolatile + storage, then the Binding Refresh Advice mobility option MUST be + omitted. Otherwise, the home agent MAY include this option to + suggest that the mobile node refreshes its binding before the + actual lifetime of the binding ends. + + If the Binding Refresh Advice mobility option is present, the + Refresh Interval field in the option MUST be set to a value less + than the Lifetime value being returned in the Binding + Acknowledgement. This indicates that the mobile node SHOULD + attempt to refresh its home registration at the indicated shorter + interval. The home agent MUST still retain the registration for + the Lifetime period, even if the mobile node does not refresh its + registration within the Refresh period. + + The rules for selecting the Destination IP address (and possibly + routing header construction) for the Binding Acknowledgement to the + mobile node are the same as in Section 9.5.4. + + In addition, the home agent MUST follow the procedure defined in + Section 10.4.1 to intercept packets on the mobile node's home link + addressed to the mobile node, while the home agent is serving as the + home agent for this mobile node. The home agent MUST also be + prepared to accept reverse tunneled packets from the new care-of + address of the mobile node, as described in Section 10.4.5. Finally, + the home agent MUST also propagate new home network prefixes, as + described in Section 10.6. + +10.3.2. Primary Care-of Address De-Registration + + A binding may need to be de-registered when the mobile node returns + home or when the mobile node knows that it will not have any care-of + addresses in the visited network. + + A Binding Update is validated and authorized in the manner described + in the previous section; note that when the mobile node de-registers + when it is at home, it may not include the Home Address destination + option, in which case the mobile node's home address is the source IP + address of the de-registration Binding Update. This section + describes the processing of a valid Binding Update that requests the + receiving node to no longer serve as its home agent, de-registering + its primary care-of address. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 92] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + To begin processing the Binding Update, the home agent MUST perform + the following test: + + o If the receiving node has no entry marked as a home registration + in its Binding Cache for this mobile node, then this node MUST + reject the Binding Update and SHOULD return a Binding + Acknowledgement to the mobile node, in which the Status field is + set to 133 (not home agent for this mobile node). + + If the home agent does not reject the Binding Update as described + above, then it MUST delete any existing entry in its Binding Cache + for this mobile node. Then, the home agent MUST return a Binding + Acknowledgement to the mobile node, constructed as follows: + + o The Status field MUST be set to a value 0, indicating success. + + o The Key Management Mobility Capability (K) bit is set or cleared + and actions based on its value are performed as described in the + previous section. The mobile node's home address is used as its + new care-of address for the purposes of moving the key management + connection to a new endpoint. + + o The Sequence Number field MUST be copied from the Sequence Number + given in the Binding Update. + + o The Lifetime field MUST be set to zero. + + o The Binding Refresh Advice mobility option MUST be omitted. + + In addition, the home agent MUST stop intercepting packets on the + mobile node's home link that are addressed to the mobile node + (Section 10.4.1). + + The rules for selecting the Destination IP address (and, if required, + routing header construction) for the Binding Acknowledgement to the + mobile node are the same as in the previous section. When the Status + field in the Binding Acknowledgement is greater than or equal to 128 + and the Source Address of the Binding Update is on the home link, the + home agent MUST send it to the mobile node's link layer address + (retrieved either from the Binding Update or through Neighbor + Solicitation). + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 93] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +10.4. Packet Processing + +10.4.1. Intercepting Packets for a Mobile Node + + While a node is serving as the home agent for mobile node it MUST + attempt to intercept packets on the mobile node's home link that are + addressed to the mobile node. + + In order to do this, when a node begins serving as the home agent it + MUST multicast onto the home link a Neighbor Advertisement message + [12] on behalf of the mobile node. For the home address specified in + the Binding Update, the home agent sends a Neighbor Advertisement + message [12] to the all-nodes multicast address on the home link to + advertise the home agent's own link-layer address for this IP address + on behalf of the mobile node. If the Link-Layer Address + Compatibility (L) flag has been specified in the Binding Update, the + home agent MUST do the same for the link-local address of the mobile + node. + + All fields in each Neighbor Advertisement message SHOULD be set in + the same way they would be set by the mobile node if it was sending + this Neighbor Advertisement [12] while at home, with the following + exceptions: + + o The Target Address in the Neighbor Advertisement MUST be set to + the specific IP address for the mobile node. + + o The Advertisement MUST include a Target Link-layer Address option + specifying the home agent's link-layer address. + + o The Router (R) bit in the Advertisement MUST be set to zero. + + o The Solicited Flag (S) in the Advertisement MUST NOT be set, since + it was not solicited by any Neighbor Solicitation. + + o The Override Flag (O) in the Advertisement MUST be set, indicating + that the Advertisement SHOULD override any existing Neighbor Cache + entry at any node receiving it. + + o The Source Address in the IPv6 header MUST be set to the home + agent's IP address on the interface used to send the + advertisement. + + Any node on the home link that receives one of the Neighbor + Advertisement messages (described above) will update its Neighbor + Cache to associate the mobile node's address with the home agent's + link layer address, causing it to transmit any future packets + normally destined to the mobile node to the mobile node's home agent. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 94] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Since multicasting on the local link (such as Ethernet) is typically + not guaranteed to be reliable, the home agent MAY retransmit this + Neighbor Advertisement message up to MAX_NEIGHBOR_ADVERTISEMENT (see + [12]) times to increase its reliability. It is still possible that + some nodes on the home link will not receive any of the Neighbor + Advertisements, but these nodes will eventually be able to detect the + link-layer address change for the mobile node's address through use + of Neighbor Unreachability Detection [12]. + + While a node is serving as a home agent for some mobile node, the + home agent uses IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [12] to intercept unicast + packets on the home link addressed to the mobile node. In order to + intercept packets in this way, the home agent MUST act as a proxy for + this mobile node and reply to any received Neighbor Solicitations for + it. When a home agent receives a Neighbor Solicitation, it MUST + check if the Target Address specified in the message matches the + address of any mobile node for which it has a Binding Cache entry + marked as a home registration. + + If such an entry exists in the home agent's Binding Cache, the home + agent MUST reply to the Neighbor Solicitation with a Neighbor + Advertisement giving the home agent's own link-layer address as the + link-layer address for the specified Target Address. In addition, + the Router (R) bit in the Advertisement MUST be set to zero. Acting + as a proxy in this way allows other nodes on the mobile node's home + link to resolve the mobile node's address and for the home agent to + defend these addresses on the home link for Duplicate Address + Detection [12]. + +10.4.2. Processing Intercepted Packets + + For any packet sent to a mobile node from the mobile node's home + agent (in which the home agent is the original sender of the packet), + the home agent is operating as a correspondent node of the mobile + node for this packet and the procedures described in Section 9.3.2 + apply. The home agent then uses a routing header to route the packet + to the mobile node by way of the primary care-of address in the home + agent's Binding Cache. + + While the mobile node is away from home, the home agent intercepts + any packets on the home link addressed to the mobile node's home + address, as described in Section 10.4.1. In order to forward each + intercepted packet to the mobile node, the home agent MUST tunnel the + packet to the mobile node using IPv6 encapsulation [15]. When a home + agent encapsulates an intercepted packet for forwarding to the mobile + node, the home agent sets the Source Address in the new tunnel IP + header to the home agent's own IP address and sets the Destination + Address in the tunnel IP header to the mobile node's primary care-of + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 95] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + address. When received by the mobile node, normal processing of the + tunnel header [15] will result in decapsulation and processing of the + original packet by the mobile node. + + However, packets addressed to the mobile node's link-local address + MUST NOT be tunneled to the mobile node. Instead, these packets MUST + be discarded and the home agent SHOULD return an ICMP Destination + Unreachable, Code 3, message to the packet's Source Address (unless + this Source Address is a multicast address). Packets addressed to + the mobile node's site-local address SHOULD NOT be tunneled to the + mobile node by default. + + Interception and tunneling of the following multicast addressed + packets on the home network are only done if the home agent supports + multicast group membership control messages from the mobile node as + described in the next section. Tunneling of multicast packets to a + mobile node follows similar limitations to those defined above for + unicast packets addressed to the mobile node's link-local and site- + local addresses. Multicast packets addressed to a multicast address + with link-local scope [3], to which the mobile node is subscribed, + MUST NOT be tunneled to the mobile node. These packets SHOULD be + silently discarded (after delivering to other local multicast + recipients). Multicast packets addressed to a multicast address with + a scope larger than link-local, but smaller than global (e.g., site- + local and organization-local [3], to which the mobile node is + subscribed, SHOULD NOT be tunneled to the mobile node. Multicast + packets addressed with a global scope, to which the mobile node has + successfully subscribed, MUST be tunneled to the mobile node. + + Before tunneling a packet to the mobile node, the home agent MUST + perform any IPsec processing as indicated by the security policy data + base. + +10.4.3. Multicast Membership Control + + This section is a prerequisite for the multicast data packet + forwarding, described in the previous section. If this support is + not provided, multicast group membership control messages are + silently ignored. + + In order to forward multicast data packets from the home network to + all the proper mobile nodes, the home agent SHOULD be capable of + receiving tunneled multicast group membership control information + from the mobile node in order to determine which groups the mobile + node has subscribed to. These multicast group membership messages + are Listener Report messages specified in MLD [17] or in other + protocols such as [37]. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 96] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The messages are issued by the mobile node, but sent through the + reverse tunnel to the home agent. These messages are issued whenever + the mobile node decides to enable reception of packets for a + multicast group or in response to an MLD Query from the home agent. + The mobile node will also issue multicast group control messages to + disable reception of multicast packets when it is no longer + interested in receiving multicasts for a particular group. + + To obtain the mobile node's current multicast group membership the + home agent must periodically transmit MLD Query messages through the + tunnel to the mobile node. These MLD periodic transmissions will + ensure the home agent has an accurate record of the groups in which + the mobile node is interested despite packet losses of the mobile + node's MLD group membership messages. + + All MLD packets are sent directly between the mobile node and the + home agent. Since all of these packets are destined to a link-scope + multicast address and have a hop limit of 1, there is no direct + forwarding of such packets between the home network and the mobile + node. The MLD packets between the mobile node and the home agent are + encapsulated within the same tunnel header used for other packet + flows between the mobile node and home agent. + + Note that at this time, even though a link-local source is used on + MLD packets, no functionality depends on these addresses being + unique, nor do they elicit direct responses. All MLD messages are + sent to multicast destinations. To avoid ambiguity on the home + agent, due to mobile nodes which may choose identical link-local + source addresses for their MLD function, it is necessary for the home + agent to identify which mobile node was actually the issuer of a + particular MLD message. This may be accomplished by noting which + tunnel such an MLD arrived by, which IPsec SA was used, or by other + distinguishing means. + + This specification puts no requirement on how the functions in this + section and the multicast forwarding in Section 10.4.2 are to be + achieved. At the time of this writing it was thought that a full + IPv6 multicast router function would be necessary on the home agent, + but it may be possible to achieve the same effects through a "proxy + MLD" application coupled with kernel multicast forwarding. This may + be the subject of future specifications. + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 97] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +10.4.4. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration + + This section describes how home agents support the use of stateful + address autoconfiguration mechanisms such as DHCPv6 [29] from the + mobile nodes. If this support is not provided, then the M and O bits + must remain cleared on the Mobile Prefix Advertisement Messages. Any + mobile node which sends DHCPv6 messages to the home agent without + this support will not receive a response. + + If DHCPv6 is used, packets are sent with link-local source addresses + either to a link-scope multicast address or a link-local address. + Mobile nodes desiring to locate a DHCPv6 service may reverse tunnel + standard DHCPv6 packets to the home agent. Since these link-scope + packets cannot be forwarded onto the home network, it is necessary + for the home agent to either implement a DHCPv6 relay agent or a + DHCPv6 server function itself. The arriving tunnel or IPsec SA of + DHCPv6 link-scope messages from the mobile node must be noted so that + DHCPv6 responses may be sent back to the appropriate mobile node. + DHCPv6 messages sent to the mobile node with a link-local destination + must be tunneled within the same tunnel header used for other packet + flows. + +10.4.5. Handling Reverse Tunneled Packets + + Unless a binding has been established between the mobile node and a + correspondent node, traffic from the mobile node to the correspondent + node goes through a reverse tunnel. Home agents MUST support reverse + tunneling as follows: + + o The tunneled traffic arrives to the home agent's address using + IPv6 encapsulation [15]. + + o Depending on the security policies used by the home agent, reverse + tunneled packets MAY be discarded unless accompanied by a valid + ESP header. The support for authenticated reverse tunneling + allows the home agent to protect the home network and + correspondent nodes from malicious nodes masquerading as a mobile + node. + + o Otherwise, when a home agent decapsulates a tunneled packet from + the mobile node, the home agent MUST verify that the Source + Address in the tunnel IP header is the mobile node's primary + care-of address. Otherwise, any node in the Internet could send + traffic through the home agent and escape ingress filtering + limitations. This simple check forces the attacker to know the + current location of the real mobile node and be able to defeat + ingress filtering. This check is not necessary if the reverse- + tunneled packet is protected by ESP in tunnel mode. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 98] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +10.4.6. Protecting Return Routability Packets + + The return routability procedure, described in Section 5.2.5, assumes + that the confidentiality of the Home Test Init and Home Test messages + is protected as they are tunneled between the home agent and the + mobile node. Therefore, the home agent MUST support tunnel mode + IPsec ESP for the protection of packets belonging to the return + routability procedure. Support for a non-null encryption transform + and authentication algorithm MUST be available. It is not necessary + to distinguish between different kinds of packets during the return + routability procedure. + + Security associations are needed to provide this protection. When + the care-of address for the mobile node changes as a result of an + accepted Binding Update, special treatment is needed for the next + packets sent using these security associations. The home agent MUST + set the new care-of address as the destination address of these + packets, as if the outer header destination address in the security + association had changed [21]. + + The above protection SHOULD be used with all mobile nodes. The use + is controlled by configuration of the IPsec security policy database + both at the mobile node and at the home agent. + + As described earlier, the Binding Update and Binding Acknowledgement + messages require protection between the home agent and the mobile + node. The Mobility Header protocol carries both these messages as + well as the return routability messages. From the point of view of + the security policy database these messages are indistinguishable. + When IPsec is used to protect return routability signaling or payload + packets, this protection MUST only be applied to the return + routability packets entering the IPv6 encapsulated tunnel interface + between the mobile node and the home agent. This can be achieved, + for instance, by defining the security policy database entries + specifically for the tunnel interface. That is, the policy entries + are not generally applied on all traffic on the physical interface(s) + of the nodes, but rather only on traffic that enters the tunnel. + This makes use of per-interface security policy database entries [4] + specific to the tunnel interface (the node's attachment to the tunnel + [11]). + +10.5. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery + + This section describes how a home agent can help mobile nodes to + discover the addresses of the home agents. The home agent keeps + track of the other home agents on the same link and responds to + queries sent by the mobile node. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 99] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +10.5.1. Receiving Router Advertisement Messages + + For each link on which a router provides service as a home agent, the + router maintains a Home Agents List recording information about all + other home agents on that link. This list is used in the dynamic + home agent address discovery mechanism, described in Section 10.5. + The information for the list is learned through receipt of the + periodic unsolicited multicast Router Advertisements, in a manner + similar to the Default Router List conceptual data structure + maintained by each host for Neighbor Discovery [12]. In the + construction of the Home Agents List, the Router Advertisements are + from each (other) home agent on the link and the Home Agent (H) bit + is set in them. + + On receipt of a valid Router Advertisement, as defined in the + processing algorithm specified for Neighbor Discovery [12], the home + agent performs the following steps in addition to any steps already + required of it by Neighbor Discovery: + + o If the Home Agent (H) bit in the Router Advertisement is not set, + delete the sending node's entry in the current Home Agents List + (if one exists). Skip all the following steps. + + o Otherwise, extract the Source Address from the IP header of the + Router Advertisement. This is the link-local IP address on this + link of the home agent sending this Advertisement [12]. + + o Determine the preference for this home agent. If the Router + Advertisement contains a Home Agent Information Option, then the + preference is taken from the Home Agent Preference field in the + option; otherwise, the default preference of 0 MUST be used. + + o Determine the lifetime for this home agent. If the Router + Advertisement contains a Home Agent Information Option, then the + lifetime is taken from the Home Agent Lifetime field in the + option; otherwise, the lifetime specified by the Router Lifetime + field in the Router Advertisement SHOULD be used. + + o If the link-local address of the home agent sending this + Advertisement is already present in this home agent's Home Agents + List and the received home agent lifetime value is zero, + immediately delete this entry in the Home Agents List. + + o Otherwise, if the link-local address of the home agent sending + this Advertisement is already present in the receiving home + agent's Home Agents List, reset its lifetime and preference to the + values determined above. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 100] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o If the link-local address of the home agent sending this + Advertisement is not already present in the Home Agents List + maintained by the receiving home agent, and the lifetime for the + sending home agent is non-zero, create a new entry in the list, + and initialize its lifetime and preference to the values + determined above. + + o If the Home Agents List entry for the link-local address of the + home agent sending this Advertisement was not deleted as described + above, determine any global address(es) of the home agent based on + each Prefix Information option received in this Advertisement in + which the Router Address (R) bit is set (Section 7.2). Add all + such global addresses to the list of global addresses in this Home + Agents List entry. + + A home agent SHOULD maintain an entry in its Home Agents List for + each valid home agent address until that entry's lifetime expires, + after which time the entry MUST be deleted. + + As described in Section 11.4.1, a mobile node attempts dynamic home + agent address discovery by sending an ICMP Home Agent Address + Discovery Request message to the Mobile IPv6 Home-Agents anycast + address [16] for its home IP subnet prefix. A home agent receiving a + Home Agent Address Discovery Request message that serves this subnet + SHOULD return an ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Reply message to + the mobile node with the Source Address of the Reply packet set to + one of the global unicast addresses of the home agent. The Home + Agent Addresses field in the Reply message is constructed as follows: + + o The Home Agent Addresses field SHOULD contain all global IP + addresses for each home agent currently listed in this home + agent's own Home Agents List (Section 10.1). + + o The IP addresses in the Home Agent Addresses field SHOULD be + listed in order of decreasing preference values, based either on + the respective advertised preference from a Home Agent Information + option or on the default preference of 0 if no preference is + advertised (or on the configured home agent preference for this + home agent itself). + + o Among home agents with equal preference, their IP addresses in the + Home Agent Addresses field SHOULD be listed in an order randomized + with respect to other home agents with equal preference every time + a Home Agent Address Discovery Reply message is returned by this + home agent. + + o If more than one global IP address is associated with a home + agent, these addresses SHOULD be listed in a randomized order. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 101] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The home agent SHOULD reduce the number of home agent IP addresses + so that the packet fits within the minimum IPv6 MTU [11]. The + home agent addresses selected for inclusion in the packet SHOULD + be those from the complete list with the highest preference. This + limitation avoids the danger of the Reply message packet being + fragmented (or rejected by an intermediate router with an ICMP + Packet Too Big message [14]). + +10.6. Sending Prefix Information to the Mobile Node + +10.6.1. List of Home Network Prefixes + + Mobile IPv6 arranges to propagate relevant prefix information to the + mobile node when it is away from home, so that it may be used in + mobile node home address configuration and in network renumbering. + In this mechanism, mobile nodes away from home receive Mobile Prefix + Advertisements messages. These messages include Prefix Information + Options for the prefixes configured on the home subnet interface(s) + of the home agent. + + If there are multiple home agents, differences in the advertisements + sent by different home agents can lead to an inability to use a + particular home address when changing to another home agent. In + order to ensure that the mobile nodes get the same information from + different home agents, it is preferred that all of the home agents on + the same link be configured in the same manner. + + To support this, the home agent monitors prefixes advertised by + itself and other home agents on the home link. In RFC 2461 [12] it + is acceptable for two routers to advertise different sets of prefixes + on the same link. For home agents, the differences should be + detected for a given home address because the mobile node + communicates only with one home agent at a time and the mobile node + needs to know the full set of prefixes assigned to the home link. + All other comparisons of Router Advertisements are as specified in + Section 6.2.7 of RFC 2461. + +10.6.2. Scheduling Prefix Deliveries + + A home agent serving a mobile node will schedule the delivery of the + new prefix information to that mobile node when any of the following + conditions occur: + + MUST: + + o The state of the flags changes for the prefix of the mobile node's + registered home address. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 102] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The valid or preferred lifetime is reconfigured or changes for any + reason other than advancing real time. + + o The mobile node requests the information with a Mobile Prefix + Solicitation (see Section 11.4.2). + + SHOULD: + + o A new prefix is added to the home subnet interface(s) of the home + agent. + + MAY: + + o The valid or preferred lifetime or the state of the flags changes + for a prefix which is not used in any Binding Cache entry for this + mobile node. + + The home agent uses the following algorithm to determine when to send + prefix information to the mobile node. + + o If a mobile node sends a solicitation, answer right away. + + o If no Mobile Prefix Advertisement has been sent to the mobile node + in the last MaxMobPfxAdvInterval seconds (see Section 13), then + ensure that a transmission is scheduled. The actual transmission + time is randomized as described below. + + o If a prefix matching the mobile node's home registration is added + on the home subnet interface or if its information changes in any + way that does not deprecate the mobile node's address, ensure that + a transmission is scheduled. The actual transmission time is + randomized as described below. + + o If a home registration expires, cancel any scheduled + advertisements to the mobile node. + + The list of prefixes is sent in its entirety in all cases. + + If the home agent has already scheduled the transmission of a Mobile + Prefix Advertisement to the mobile node, then the home agent will + replace the advertisement with a new one to be sent at the scheduled + time. + + Otherwise, the home agent computes a fresh value for RAND_ADV_DELAY + which offsets from the current time for the scheduled transmission. + First calculate the maximum delay for the scheduled Advertisement: + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 103] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + MaxScheduleDelay = min (MaxMobPfxAdvInterval, Preferred Lifetime), + + where MaxMobPfxAdvInterval is as defined in Section 12. Then compute + the final delay for the advertisement: + + RAND_ADV_DELAY = MinMobPfxAdvInterval + + (rand() % abs(MaxScheduleDelay - MinMobPfxAdvInterval)) + + Here rand() returns a random integer value in the range of 0 to the + maximum possible integer value. This computation is expected to + alleviate bursts of advertisements when prefix information changes. + In addition, a home agent MAY further reduce the rate of packet + transmission by further delaying individual advertisements, when + necessary to avoid overwhelming local network resources. The home + agent SHOULD periodically continue to retransmit an unsolicited + Advertisement to the mobile node, until it is acknowledged by the + receipt of a Mobile Prefix Solicitation from the mobile node. + + The home agent MUST wait PREFIX_ADV_TIMEOUT (see Section 12) before + the first retransmission and double the retransmission wait time for + every succeeding retransmission until a maximum number of + PREFIX_ADV_RETRIES attempts (see Section 12) has been tried. If the + mobile node's bindings expire before the matching Binding Update has + been received, then the home agent MUST NOT attempt any more + retransmissions, even if not all PREFIX_ADV_RETRIES have been + retransmitted. In the meantime, if the mobile node sends another + Binding Update without returning home, then the home agent SHOULD + begin transmitting the unsolicited Advertisement again. + + If some condition, as described above, occurs on the home link and + causes another Prefix Advertisement to be sent to the mobile node, + before the mobile node acknowledges a previous transmission, the home + agent SHOULD combine any Prefix Information options in the + unacknowledged Mobile Prefix Advertisement into a new Advertisement. + The home agent then discards the old Advertisement. + +10.6.3. Sending Advertisements + + When sending a Mobile Prefix Advertisement to the mobile node, the + home agent MUST construct the packet as follows: + + o The Source Address in the packet's IPv6 header MUST be set to the + home agent's IP address to which the mobile node addressed its + current home registration or its default global home agent address + if no binding exists. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 104] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o If the advertisement was solicited, it MUST be destined to the + source address of the solicitation. If it was triggered by prefix + changes or renumbering, the advertisement's destination will be + the mobile node's home address in the binding which triggered the + rule. + + o A type 2 routing header MUST be included with the mobile node's + home address. + + o IPsec headers MUST be supported and SHOULD be used. + + o The home agent MUST send the packet as it would any other unicast + IPv6 packet that it originates. + + o Set the Managed Address Configuration (M) flag if the + corresponding flag has been set in any of the Router + Advertisements from which the prefix information has been learned + (including the ones sent by this home agent). + + o Set the Other Stateful Configuration (O) flag if the corresponding + flag has been set in any of the Router Advertisements from which + the prefix information has been learned (including the ones sent + by this home agent). + +10.6.4. Lifetimes for Changed Prefixes + + As described in Section 10.3.1, the lifetime returned by the home + agent in a Binding Acknowledgement MUST not be greater than the + remaining valid lifetime for the subnet prefix in the mobile node's + home address. This limit on the binding lifetime serves to prohibit + use of a mobile node's home address after it becomes invalid. + +11. Mobile Node Operation + +11.1. Conceptual Data Structures + + Each mobile node MUST maintain a Binding Update List. + + The Binding Update List records information for each Binding Update + sent by this mobile node, in which the lifetime of the binding has + not yet expired. The Binding Update List includes all bindings sent + by the mobile node either to its home agent or correspondent nodes. + It also contains Binding Updates which are waiting for the completion + of the return routability procedure before they can be sent. + However, for multiple Binding Updates sent to the same destination + address, the Binding Update List contains only the most recent + Binding Update (i.e., with the greatest Sequence Number value) sent + to that destination. The Binding Update List MAY be implemented in + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 105] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + any manner consistent with the external behavior described in this + document. + + Each Binding Update List entry conceptually contains the following + fields: + + o The IP address of the node to which a Binding Update was sent. + + o The home address for which that Binding Update was sent. + + o The care-of address sent in that Binding Update. This value is + necessary for the mobile node to determine if it has sent a + Binding Update while giving its new care-of address to this + destination after changing its care-of address. + + o The initial value of the Lifetime field sent in that Binding + Update. + + o The remaining lifetime of that binding. This lifetime is + initialized from the Lifetime value sent in the Binding Update and + is decremented until it reaches zero, at which time this entry + MUST be deleted from the Binding Update List. + + o The maximum value of the Sequence Number field sent in previous + Binding Updates to this destination. The Sequence Number field is + 16 bits long and all comparisons between Sequence Number values + MUST be performed modulo 2**16 (see Section 9.5.1). + + o The time at which a Binding Update was last sent to this + destination, as needed to implement the rate limiting restriction + for sending Binding Updates. + + o The state of any retransmissions needed for this Binding Update. + This state includes the time remaining until the next + retransmission attempt for the Binding Update and the current + state of the exponential back-off mechanism for retransmissions. + + o A flag specifying whether or not future Binding Updates should be + sent to this destination. The mobile node sets this flag in the + Binding Update List entry when it receives an ICMP Parameter + Problem, Code 1, error message in response to a return routability + message or Binding Update sent to that destination, as described + in Section 11.3.5. + + The Binding Update List is used to determine whether a particular + packet is sent directly to the correspondent node or tunneled via the + home agent (see Section 11.3.1). + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 106] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Binding Update list also conceptually contains the following data + related to running the return routability procedure. This data is + relevant only for Binding Updates sent to correspondent nodes. + + o The time at which a Home Test Init or Care-of Test Init message + was last sent to this destination, as needed to implement the rate + limiting restriction for the return routability procedure. + + o The state of any retransmissions needed for this return + routability procedure. This state includes the time remaining + until the next retransmission attempt and the current state of the + exponential back-off mechanism for retransmissions. + + o Cookie values used in the Home Test Init and Care-of Test Init + messages. + + o Home and care-of keygen tokens received from the correspondent + node. + + o Home and care-of nonce indices received from the correspondent + node. + + o The time at which each of the tokens and nonces were received from + the correspondent node, as needed to implement reuse while moving. + +11.2. Processing Mobility Headers + + All IPv6 mobile nodes MUST observe the rules described in Section 9.2 + when processing Mobility Headers. + +11.3. Packet Processing + +11.3.1. Sending Packets While Away from Home + + While a mobile node is away from home, it continues to use its home + address, as well as also using one or more care-of addresses. When + sending a packet while away from home, a mobile node MAY choose among + these in selecting the address that it will use as the source of the + packet, as follows: + + o Protocols layered over IP will generally treat the mobile node's + home address as its IP address for most packets. For packets sent + that are part of transport-level connections established while the + mobile node was at home, the mobile node MUST use its home + address. Likewise, for packets sent that are part of transport- + level connections that the mobile node may still be using after + moving to a new location, the mobile node SHOULD use its home + address in this way. If a binding exists, the mobile node SHOULD + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 107] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + send the packets directly to the correspondent node. Otherwise, + if a binding does not exist, the mobile node MUST use reverse + tunneling. + + o The mobile node MAY choose to directly use one of its care-of + addresses as the source of the packet, not requiring the use of a + Home Address option in the packet. This is particularly useful + for short-term communication that may easily be retried if it + fails. Using the mobile node's care-of address as the source for + such queries will generally have a lower overhead than using the + mobile node's home address, since no extra options need be used in + either the query or its reply. Such packets can be routed + normally, directly between their source and destination without + relying on Mobile IPv6. If application running on the mobile node + has no particular knowledge that the communication being sent fits + within this general type of communication, however, the mobile + node should not use its care-of address as the source of the + packet in this way. + + The choice of the most efficient communications method is + application specific, and outside the scope of this specification. + The APIs necessary for controlling the choice are also out of + scope. + + o While not at its home link, the mobile node MUST NOT use the Home + Address destination option when communicating with link-local or + site-local peers, if the scope of the home address is larger than + the scope of the peer's address. + + Similarly, the mobile node MUST NOT use the Home Address + destination option for IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [12] packets. + + Detailed operation of these cases is described later in this section + and also discussed in [31]. + + For packets sent by a mobile node while it is at home, no special + Mobile IPv6 processing is required. Likewise, if the mobile node + uses any address other than one of its home addresses as the source + of a packet sent while away from home, no special Mobile IPv6 + processing is required. In either case, the packet is simply + addressed and transmitted in the same way as any normal IPv6 packet. + + For packets sent by the mobile node sent while away from home using + the mobile node's home address as the source, special Mobile IPv6 + processing of the packet is required. This can be done in the + following two ways: + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 108] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Route Optimization + + This manner of delivering packets does not require going through the + home network, and typically will enable faster and more reliable + transmission. + + The mobile node needs to ensure that a Binding Cache entry exists for + its home address so that the correspondent node can process the + packet (Section 9.3.1 specifies the rules for Home Address + Destination Option Processing at a correspondent node). The mobile + node SHOULD examine its Binding Update List for an entry which + fulfills the following conditions: + + * The Source Address field of the packet being sent is equal to the + home address in the entry. + + * The Destination Address field of the packet being sent is equal to + the address of the correspondent node in the entry. + + * One of the current care-of addresses of the mobile node appears as + the care-of address in the entry. + + * The entry indicates that a binding has been successfully created. + + * The remaining lifetime of the binding is greater than zero. + + When these conditions are met, the mobile node knows that the + correspondent node has a suitable Binding Cache entry. + + A mobile node SHOULD arrange to supply the home address in a Home + Address option, and MUST set the IPv6 header's Source Address field + to the care-of address which the mobile node has registered to be + used with this correspondent node. The correspondent node will then + use the address supplied in the Home Address option to serve the + function traditionally done by the Source IP address in the IPv6 + header. The mobile node's home address is then supplied to higher + protocol layers and applications. + + Specifically: + + * Construct the packet using the mobile node's home address as the + packet's Source Address, in the same way as if the mobile node + were at home. This includes the calculation of upper layer + checksums using the home address as the value of the source. + + * Insert a Home Address option into the packet with the Home Address + field copied from the original value of the Source Address field + in the packet. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 109] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + * Change the Source Address field in the packet's IPv6 header to one + of the mobile node's care-of addresses. This will typically be + the mobile node's current primary care-of address, but MUST be an + address assigned to the interface on the link being used. + + By using the care-of address as the Source Address in the IPv6 + header, with the mobile node's home address instead in the Home + Address option, the packet will be able to safely pass through any + router implementing ingress filtering [26]. + + Reverse Tunneling + + This is the mechanism which tunnels the packets via the home + agent. It is not as efficient as the above mechanism, but is + needed if there is no binding yet with the correspondent node. + + This mechanism is used for packets that have the mobile node's + home address as the Source Address in the IPv6 header, or with + multicast control protocol packets as described in Section 11.3.4. + Specifically: + + * The packet is sent to the home agent using IPv6 encapsulation + [15]. + + * The Source Address in the tunnel packet is the primary care-of + address as registered with the home agent. + + * The Destination Address in the tunnel packet is the home + agent's address. + + Then, the home agent will pass the encapsulated packet to the + correspondent node. + +11.3.2. Interaction with Outbound IPsec Processing + + This section sketches the interaction between outbound Mobile IPv6 + processing and outbound IP Security (IPsec) processing for packets + sent by a mobile node while away from home. Any specific + implementation MAY use algorithms and data structures other than + those suggested here, but its processing MUST be consistent with the + effect of the operation described here and with the relevant IPsec + specifications. In the steps described below, it is assumed that + IPsec is being used in transport mode [4] and that the mobile node is + using its home address as the source for the packet (from the point + of view of higher protocol layers or applications, as described in + Section 11.3.1): + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 110] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The packet is created by higher layer protocols and applications + (e.g., by TCP) as if the mobile node were at home and Mobile IPv6 + were not being used. + + o Determine the outgoing interface for the packet. (Note that the + selection between reverse tunneling and route optimization may + imply different interfaces, particularly if tunnels are considered + interfaces as well.) + + o As part of outbound packet processing in IP, the packet is + compared against the IPsec security policy database to determine + what processing is required for the packet [4]. + + o If IPsec processing is required, the packet is either mapped to an + existing Security Association (or SA bundle), or a new SA (or SA + bundle) is created for the packet, according to the procedures + defined for IPsec. + + o Since the mobile node is away from home, the mobile is either + using reverse tunneling or route optimization to reach the + correspondent node. + + If reverse tunneling is used, the packet is constructed in the + normal manner and then tunneled through the home agent. + + If route optimization is in use, the mobile node inserts a Home + Address destination option into the packet, replacing the Source + Address in the packet's IP header with the care-of address used + with this correspondent node, as described in Section 11.3.1. The + Destination Options header in which the Home Address destination + option is inserted MUST appear in the packet after the routing + header, if present, and before the IPsec (AH [5] or ESP [6]) + header, so that the Home Address destination option is processed + by the destination node before the IPsec header is processed. + + Finally, once the packet is fully assembled, the necessary IPsec + authentication (and encryption, if required) processing is + performed on the packet, initializing the Authentication Data in + the IPsec header. + + RFC 2402 treatment of destination options is extended as follows. + The AH authentication data MUST be calculated as if the following + were true: + + * the IPv6 source address in the IPv6 header contains the mobile + node's home address, + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 111] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + * the Home Address field of the Home Address destination option + (Section 6.3) contains the new care-of address. + + o This allows, but does not require, the receiver of the packet + containing a Home Address destination option to exchange the two + fields of the incoming packet to reach the above situation, + simplifying processing for all subsequent packet headers. + However, such an exchange is not required, as long as the result + of the authentication calculation remains the same. + + When an automated key management protocol is used to create new + security associations for a peer, it is important to ensure that the + peer can send the key management protocol packets to the mobile node. + This may not be possible if the peer is the home agent of the mobile + node and the purpose of the security associations would be to send a + Binding Update to the home agent. Packets addressed to the home + address of the mobile node cannot be used before the Binding Update + has been processed. For the default case of using IKE [9] as the + automated key management protocol, such problems can be avoided by + the following requirements when communicating with its home agent: + + o When the mobile node is away from home, it MUST use its care-of + address as the Source Address of all packets it sends as part of + the key management protocol (without use of Mobile IPv6 for these + packets, as suggested in Section 11.3.1). + + o In addition, for all security associations bound to the mobile + node's home address established by IKE, the mobile node MUST + include an ISAKMP Identification Payload [8] in the IKE phase 2 + exchange, giving the mobile node's home address as the initiator + of the Security Association [7]. + + The Key Management Mobility Capability (K) bit in Binding Updates and + Acknowledgements can be used to avoid the need to rerun IKE upon + movements. + +11.3.3. Receiving Packets While Away from Home + + While away from home, a mobile node will receive packets addressed to + its home address, by one of two methods: + + o Packets sent by a correspondent node, that does not have a Binding + Cache entry for the mobile node, will be sent to the home address, + captured by the home agent and tunneled to the mobile node. + + o Packets sent by a correspondent node that has a Binding Cache + entry for the mobile node that contains the mobile node's current + care-of address, will be sent by the correspondent node using a + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 112] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + type 2 routing header. The packet will be addressed to the mobile + node's care-of address, with the final hop in the routing header + directing the packet to the mobile node's home address; the + processing of this last hop of the routing header is entirely + internal to the mobile node, since the care-of address and home + address are both addresses within the mobile node. + + For packets received by the first method, the mobile node MUST check + that the IPv6 source address of the tunneled packet is the IP address + of its home agent. In this method, the mobile node may also send a + Binding Update to the original sender of the packet as described in + Section 11.7.2 and subject to the rate limiting defined in Section + 11.8. The mobile node MUST also process the received packet in the + manner defined for IPv6 encapsulation [15], which will result in the + encapsulated (inner) packet being processed normally by upper-layer + protocols within the mobile node as if it had been addressed (only) + to the mobile node's home address. + + For packets received by the second method, the following rules will + result in the packet being processed normally by upper-layer + protocols within the mobile node as if it had been addressed to the + mobile node's home address. + + A node receiving a packet addressed to itself (i.e., one of the + node's addresses is in the IPv6 destination field) follows the next + header chain of headers and processes them. When it encounters a + type 2 routing header during this processing, it performs the + following checks. If any of these checks fail, the node MUST + silently discard the packet. + + o The length field in the routing header is exactly 2. + + o The segments left field in the routing header is 1 on the wire. + (But implementations may process the routing header so that the + value may become 0 after the routing header has been processed, + but before the rest of the packet is processed.) + + o The Home Address field in the routing header is one of the node's + home addresses, if the segments left field was 1. Thus, in + particular the address field is required to be a unicast routable + address. + + Once the above checks have been performed, the node swaps the IPv6 + destination field with the Home Address field in the routing header, + decrements segments left by one from the value it had on the wire, + and resubmits the packet to IP for processing the next header. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 113] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Conceptually, this follows the same model as in RFC 2460. However, + in the case of type 2 routing header this can be simplified since it + is known that the packet will not be forwarded to a different node. + + The definition of AH requires the sender to calculate the AH + integrity check value of a routing header in the same way it appears + in the receiver after it has processed the header. Since IPsec + headers follow the routing header, any IPsec processing will operate + on the packet with the home address in the IP destination field and + segments left being zero. Thus, the AH calculations at the sender + and receiver will have an identical view of the packet. + +11.3.4. Routing Multicast Packets + + A mobile node that is connected to its home link functions in the + same way as any other (stationary) node. Thus, when it is at home, a + mobile node functions identically to other multicast senders and + receivers. Therefore, this section describes the behavior of a + mobile node that is not on its home link. + + In order to receive packets sent to some multicast group, a mobile + node must join that multicast group. One method, in which a mobile + node MAY join the group, is via a (local) multicast router on the + foreign link being visited. In this case, the mobile node MUST use + its care-of address and MUST NOT use the Home Address destination + option when sending MLD packets [17]. + + Alternatively, a mobile node MAY join multicast groups via a bi- + directional tunnel to its home agent. The mobile node tunnels its + multicast group membership control packets (such as those defined in + [17] or in [37]) to its home agent, and the home agent forwards + multicast packets down the tunnel to the mobile node. A mobile node + MUST NOT tunnel multicast group membership control packets until (1) + the mobile node has a binding in place at the home agent, and (2) the + latter sends at least one multicast group membership control packet + via the tunnel. Once this condition is true, the mobile node SHOULD + assume it does not change as long as the binding does not expire. + + A mobile node that wishes to send packets to a multicast group also + has two options: + + 1. Send directly on the foreign link being visited. + + The application is aware of the care-of address and uses it as a + source address for multicast traffic, just like it would use a + stationary address. The mobile node MUST NOT use Home Address + destination option in such traffic. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 114] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 2. Send via a tunnel to its home agent. + + Because multicast routing in general depends upon the Source + Address used in the IPv6 header of the multicast packet, a mobile + node that tunnels a multicast packet to its home agent MUST use + its home address as the IPv6 Source Address of the inner + multicast packet. + + Note that direct sending from the foreign link is only applicable + while the mobile node is at that foreign link. This is because the + associated multicast tree is specific to that source location and any + change of location and source address will invalidate the source + specific tree or branch and the application context of the other + multicast group members. + + This specification does not provide mechanisms to enable such local + multicast session to survive hand-off and to seamlessly continue from + a new care-of address on each new foreign link. Any such mechanism, + developed as an extension to this specification, needs to take into + account the impact of fast moving mobile nodes on the Internet + multicast routing protocols and their ability to maintain the + integrity of source specific multicast trees and branches. + + While the use of bidirectional tunneling can ensure that multicast + trees are independent of the mobile nodes movement, in some case such + tunneling can have adverse affects. The latency of specific types of + multicast applications (such as multicast based discovery protocols) + will be affected when the round-trip time between the foreign subnet + and the home agent is significant compared to that of the topology to + be discovered. In addition, the delivery tree from the home agent in + such circumstances relies on unicast encapsulation from the agent to + the mobile node. Therefore, bandwidth usage is inefficient compared + to the native multicast forwarding in the foreign multicast system. + +11.3.5. Receiving ICMP Error Messages + + Any node that does not recognize the Mobility header will return an + ICMP Parameter Problem, Code 1, message to the sender of the packet. + If the mobile node receives such an ICMP error message in response to + a return routability procedure or Binding Update, it SHOULD record in + its Binding Update List that future Binding Updates SHOULD NOT be + sent to this destination. Such Binding Update List entries SHOULD be + removed after a period of time in order to allow for retrying route + optimization. + + New Binding Update List entries MUST NOT be created as a result of + receiving ICMP error messages. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 115] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Correspondent nodes that have participated in the return routability + procedure MUST implement the ability to correctly process received + packets containing a Home Address destination option. Therefore, + correctly implemented correspondent nodes should always be able to + recognize Home Address options. If a mobile node receives an ICMP + Parameter Problem, Code 2, message from some node indicating that it + does not support the Home Address option, the mobile node SHOULD log + the error and then discard the ICMP message. + +11.3.6. Receiving Binding Error Messages + + When a mobile node receives a packet containing a Binding Error + message, it should first check if the mobile node has a Binding + Update List entry for the source of the Binding Error message. If + the mobile node does not have such an entry, it MUST ignore the + message. This is necessary to prevent a waste of resources on, e.g., + return routability procedure due to spoofed Binding Error messages. + + Otherwise, if the message Status field was 1 (unknown binding for + Home Address destination option), the mobile node should perform one + of the following two actions: + + o If the mobile node has recent upper layer progress information, + which indicates that communications with the correspondent node + are progressing, it MAY ignore the message. This can be done in + order to limit the damage that spoofed Binding Error messages can + cause to ongoing communications. + + o If the mobile node has no upper layer progress information, it + MUST remove the entry and route further communications through the + home agent. It MAY also optionally start a return routability + procedure (see Section 5.2). + + If the message Status field was 2 (unrecognized MH Type value), the + mobile node should perform one of the following two actions: + + o If the mobile node is not expecting an acknowledgement or response + from the correspondent node, the mobile node SHOULD ignore this + message. + + o Otherwise, the mobile node SHOULD cease the use of any extensions + to this specification. If no extensions had been used, the mobile + node should cease the attempt to use route optimization. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 116] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +11.4. Home Agent and Prefix Management + +11.4.1. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery + + Sometimes when the mobile node needs to send a Binding Update to its + home agent to register its new primary care-of address, as described + in Section 11.7.1, the mobile node may not know the address of any + router on its home link that can serve as a home agent for it. For + example, some nodes on its home link may have been reconfigured while + the mobile node has been away from home, such that the router that + was operating as the mobile node's home agent has been replaced by a + different router serving this role. + + In this case, the mobile node MAY attempt to discover the address of + a suitable home agent on its home link. To do so, the mobile node + sends an ICMP Home Agent Address Discovery Request message to the + Mobile IPv6 Home-Agents anycast address [16] for its home subnet + prefix. As described in Section 10.5, the home agent on its home + link that receives this Request message will return an ICMP Home + Agent Address Discovery Reply message. This message gives the + addresses for the home agents operating on the home link. + + The mobile node, upon receiving this Home Agent Address Discovery + Reply message, MAY then send its home registration Binding Update to + any of the unicast IP addresses listed in the Home Agent Addresses + field in the Reply. For example, the mobile node MAY attempt its + home registration to each of these addresses, in turn, until its + registration is accepted. The mobile node sends a Binding Update to + an address and waits for the matching Binding Acknowledgement, moving + on to the next address if there is no response. The mobile node + MUST, however, wait at least InitialBindackTimeoutFirstReg seconds + (see Section 13) before sending a Binding Update to the next home + agent. In trying each of the returned home agent addresses, the + mobile node SHOULD try each of them in the order they appear in the + Home Agent Addresses field in the received Home Agent Address + Discovery Reply message. + + If the mobile node has a current registration with some home agent + (the Lifetime for that registration has not yet expired), then the + mobile node MUST attempt any new registration first with that home + agent. If that registration attempt fails (e.g., timed out or + rejected), the mobile node SHOULD then reattempt this registration + with another home agent. If the mobile node knows of no other + suitable home agent, then it MAY attempt the dynamic home agent + address discovery mechanism described above. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 117] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + If, after a mobile node transmits a Home Agent Address Discovery + Request message to the Home Agents Anycast address, it does not + receive a corresponding Home Agent Address Discovery Reply message + within INITIAL_DHAAD_TIMEOUT (see Section 12) seconds, the mobile + node MAY retransmit the same Request message to the same anycast + address. This retransmission MAY be repeated up to a maximum of + DHAAD_RETRIES (see Section 12) attempts. Each retransmission MUST be + delayed by twice the time interval of the previous retransmission. + +11.4.2. Sending Mobile Prefix Solicitations + + When a mobile node has a home address that is about to become + invalid, it SHOULD send a Mobile Prefix Solicitation to its home + agent in an attempt to acquire fresh routing prefix information. The + new information also enables the mobile node to participate in + renumbering operations affecting the home network, as described in + Section 10.6. + + The mobile node MUST use the Home Address destination option to carry + its home address. The mobile node MUST support and SHOULD use IPsec + to protect the solicitation. The mobile node MUST set the Identifier + field in the ICMP header to a random value. + + As described in Section 11.7.2, Binding Updates sent by the mobile + node to other nodes MUST use a lifetime no greater than the remaining + lifetime of its home registration of its primary care-of address. + The mobile node SHOULD further limit the lifetimes that it sends on + any Binding Updates to be within the remaining valid lifetime (see + Section 10.6.2) for the prefix in its home address. + + When the lifetime for a changed prefix decreases, and the change + would cause cached bindings at correspondent nodes in the Binding + Update List to be stored past the newly shortened lifetime, the + mobile node MUST issue a Binding Update to all such correspondent + nodes. + + These limits on the binding lifetime serve to prohibit use of a + mobile node's home address after it becomes invalid. + +11.4.3. Receiving Mobile Prefix Advertisements + + Section 10.6 describes the operation of a home agent to support boot + time configuration and renumbering a mobile node's home subnet while + the mobile node is away from home. The home agent sends Mobile + Prefix Advertisements to the mobile node while away from home, giving + "important" Prefix Information options that describe changes in the + prefixes in use on the mobile node's home link. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 118] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The Mobile Prefix Solicitation is similar to the Router Solicitation + used in Neighbor Discovery [12], except it is routed from the mobile + node on the visited network to the home agent on the home network by + usual unicast routing rules. + + When a mobile node receives a Mobile Prefix Advertisement, it MUST + validate it according to the following test: + + o The Source Address of the IP packet carrying the Mobile Prefix + Advertisement is the same as the home agent address to which the + mobile node last sent an accepted home registration Binding Update + to register its primary care-of address. Otherwise, if no such + registrations have been made, it SHOULD be the mobile node's + stored home agent address, if one exists. Otherwise, if the + mobile node has not yet discovered its home agent's address, it + MUST NOT accept Mobile Prefix Advertisements. + + o The packet MUST have a type 2 routing header and SHOULD be + protected by an IPsec header as described in Section 5.4 and + Section 6.8. + + o If the ICMP Identifier value matches the ICMP Identifier value of + the most recently sent Mobile Prefix Solicitation and no other + advertisement has yet been received for this value, then the + advertisement is considered to be solicited and will be processed + further. + + Otherwise, the advertisement is unsolicited, and MUST be + discarded. In this case the mobile node SHOULD send a Mobile + Prefix Solicitation. + + Any received Mobile Prefix Advertisement not meeting these tests MUST + be silently discarded. + + For an accepted Mobile Prefix Advertisement, the mobile node MUST + process Managed Address Configuration (M), Other Stateful + Configuration (O), and the Prefix Information Options as if they + arrived in a Router Advertisement [12] on the mobile node's home + link. (This specification does not, however, describe how to acquire + home addresses through stateful protocols.) Such processing may + result in the mobile node configuring a new home address, although + due to separation between preferred lifetime and valid lifetime, such + changes should not affect most communications by the mobile node, in + the same way as for nodes that are at home. + + This specification assumes that any security associations and + security policy entries that may be needed for new prefixes have been + pre-configured in the mobile node. Note that while dynamic key + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 119] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + management avoids the need to create new security associations, it is + still necessary to add policy entries to protect the communications + involving the home address(es). Mechanisms for automatic set-up of + these entries are outside the scope of this specification. + +11.5. Movement + +11.5.1. Movement Detection + + The primary goal of movement detection is to detect L3 handovers. + This section does not attempt to specify a fast movement detection + algorithm which will function optimally for all types of + applications, link-layers and deployment scenarios; instead, it + describes a generic method that uses the facilities of IPv6 Neighbor + Discovery, including Router Discovery and Neighbor Unreachability + Detection. At the time of this writing, this method is considered + well enough understood to recommend for standardization, however it + is expected that future versions of this specification or other + specifications may contain updated versions of the movement detection + algorithm that have better performance. + + Generic movement detection uses Neighbor Unreachability Detection to + detect when the default router is no longer bi-directionally + reachable, in which case the mobile node must discover a new default + router (usually on a new link). However, this detection only occurs + when the mobile node has packets to send, and in the absence of + frequent Router Advertisements or indications from the link-layer, + the mobile node might become unaware of an L3 handover that occurred. + Therefore, the mobile node should supplement this method with other + information whenever it is available to the mobile node (e.g., from + lower protocol layers). + + When the mobile node detects an L3 handover, it performs Duplicate + Address Detection [13] on its link-local address, selects a new + default router as a consequence of Router Discovery, and then + performs Prefix Discovery with that new router to form new care-of + address(es) as described in Section 11.5.2. It then registers its + new primary care-of address with its home agent as described in + Section 11.7.1. After updating its home registration, the mobile + node then updates associated mobility bindings in correspondent nodes + that it is performing route optimization with as specified in Section + 11.7.2. + + Due to the temporary packet flow disruption and signaling overhead + involved in updating mobility bindings, the mobile node should avoid + performing an L3 handover until it is strictly necessary. + Specifically, when the mobile node receives a Router Advertisement + from a new router that contains a different set of on-link prefixes, + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 120] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + if the mobile node detects that the currently selected default router + on the old link is still bi-directionally reachable, it should + generally continue to use the old router on the old link rather than + switch away from it to use a new default router. + + Mobile nodes can use the information in received Router + Advertisements to detect L3 handovers. In doing so the mobile node + needs to consider the following issues: + + o There might be multiple routers on the same link, thus hearing a + new router does not necessarily constitute an L3 handover. + + o When there are multiple routers on the same link they might + advertise different prefixes. Thus even hearing a new router with + a new prefix might not be a reliable indication of an L3 handover. + + o The link-local addresses of routers are not globally unique, hence + after completing an L3 handover the mobile node might continue to + receive Router Advertisements with the same link-local source + address. This might be common if routers use the same link-local + address on multiple interfaces. This issue can be avoided when + routers use the Router Address (R) bit, since that provides a + global address of the router. + + In addition, the mobile node should consider the following events as + indications that an L3 handover may have occurred. Upon receiving + such indications, the mobile node needs to perform Router Discovery + to discover routers and prefixes on the new link, as described in + Section 6.3.7 of RFC 2461 [12]. + + o If Router Advertisements that the mobile node receives include an + Advertisement Interval option, the mobile node may use its + Advertisement Interval field as an indication of the frequency + with which it should expect to continue to receive future + Advertisements from that router. This field specifies the minimum + rate (the maximum amount of time between successive + Advertisements) that the mobile node should expect. If this + amount of time elapses without the mobile node receiving any + Advertisement from this router, the mobile node can be sure that + at least one Advertisement sent by the router has been lost. The + mobile node can then implement its own policy to determine how + many lost Advertisements from its current default router + constitute an L3 handover indication. + + o Neighbor Unreachability Detection determines that the default + router is no longer reachable. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 121] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o With some types of networks, notification that an L2 handover has + occurred might be obtained from lower layer protocols or device + driver software within the mobile node. While further details + around handling L2 indications as movement hints is an item for + further study, at the time of writing this specification the + following is considered reasonable: + + An L2 handover indication may or may not imply L2 movement and L2 + movement may or may not imply L3 movement; the correlations might + be a function of the type of L2 but might also be a function of + actual deployment of the wireless topology. + + Unless it is well-known that an L2 handover indication is likely + to imply L3 movement, instead of immediately multicasting a router + solicitation it may be better to attempt to verify whether the + default router is still bi-directionally reachable. This can be + accomplished by sending a unicast Neighbor Solicitation and + waiting for a Neighbor Advertisement with the solicited flag set. + Note that this is similar to Neighbor Unreachability detection but + it does not have the same state machine, such as the STALE state. + + If the default router does not respond to the Neighbor + Solicitation it makes sense to proceed to multicasting a Router + Solicitation. + +11.5.2. Forming New Care-of Addresses + + After detecting that it has moved a mobile node SHOULD generate a new + primary care-of address using normal IPv6 mechanisms. This SHOULD + also be done when the current primary care-of address becomes + deprecated. A mobile node MAY form a new primary care-of address at + any time, but a mobile node MUST NOT send a Binding Update about a + new care-of address to its home agent more than MAX_UPDATE_RATE times + within a second. + + In addition, a mobile node MAY form new non-primary care-of addresses + even when it has not switched to a new default router. A mobile node + can have only one primary care-of address at a time (which is + registered with its home agent), but it MAY have an additional care- + of address for any or all of the prefixes on its current link. + Furthermore, since a wireless network interface may actually allow a + mobile node to be reachable on more than one link at a time (i.e., + within wireless transmitter range of routers on more than one + separate link), a mobile node MAY have care-of addresses on more than + one link at a time. The use of more than one care-of address at a + time is described in Section 11.5.3. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 122] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + As described in Section 4, in order to form a new care-of address, a + mobile node MAY use either stateless [13] or stateful (e.g., DHCPv6 + [29]) Address Autoconfiguration. If a mobile node needs to use a + source address (other than the unspecified address) in packets sent + as a part of address autoconfiguration, it MUST use an IPv6 link- + local address rather than its own IPv6 home address. + + RFC 2462 [13] specifies that in normal processing for Duplicate + Address Detection, the node SHOULD delay sending the initial Neighbor + Solicitation message by a random delay between 0 and + MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_DELAY. Since delaying DAD can result in + significant delays in configuring a new care-of address when the + Mobile Node moves to a new link, the Mobile Node preferably SHOULD + NOT delay DAD when configuring a new care-of address. The Mobile + Node SHOULD delay according to the mechanisms specified in RFC 2462 + unless the implementation has a behavior that desynchronizes the + steps that happen before the DAD in the case that multiple nodes + experience handover at the same time. Such desynchronizing behaviors + might be due to random delays in the L2 protocols or device drivers, + or due to the movement detection mechanism that is used. + +11.5.3. Using Multiple Care-of Addresses + + As described in Section 11.5.2, a mobile node MAY use more than one + care-of address at a time. Particularly in the case of many wireless + networks, a mobile node effectively might be reachable through + multiple links at the same time (e.g., with overlapping wireless + cells), on which different on-link subnet prefixes may exist. The + mobile node MUST ensure that its primary care-of address always has a + prefix that is advertised by its current default router. After + selecting a new primary care-of address, the mobile node MUST send a + Binding Update containing that care-of address to its home agent. + The Binding Update MUST have the Home Registration (H) and + Acknowledge (A) bits set its home agent, as described on Section + 11.7.1. + + To assist with smooth handovers, a mobile node SHOULD retain its + previous primary care-of address as a (non-primary) care-of address, + and SHOULD still accept packets at this address, even after + registering its new primary care-of address with its home agent. + This is reasonable, since the mobile node could only receive packets + at its previous primary care-of address if it were indeed still + connected to that link. If the previous primary care-of address was + allocated using stateful Address Autoconfiguration [29], the mobile + node may not wish to release the address immediately upon switching + to a new primary care-of address. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 123] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Whenever a mobile node determines that it is no longer reachable + through a given link, it SHOULD invalidate all care-of addresses + associated with address prefixes that it discovered from routers on + the unreachable link which are not in the current set of address + prefixes advertised by the (possibly new) current default router. + +11.5.4. Returning Home + + A mobile node detects that it has returned to its home link through + the movement detection algorithm in use (Section 11.5.1), when the + mobile node detects that its home subnet prefix is again on-link. + The mobile node SHOULD then send a Binding Update to its home agent, + to instruct its home agent to no longer intercept or tunnel packets + for it. In this home registration, the mobile node MUST set the + Acknowledge (A) and Home Registration (H) bits, set the Lifetime + field to zero, and set the care-of address for the binding to the + mobile node's own home address. The mobile node MUST use its home + address as the source address in the Binding Update. + + When sending this Binding Update to its home agent, the mobile node + must be careful in how it uses Neighbor Solicitation [12] (if needed) + to learn the home agent's link-layer address, since the home agent + will be currently configured to intercept packets to the mobile + node's home address using Duplicate Address Detection (DAD). In + particular, the mobile node is unable to use its home address as the + Source Address in the Neighbor Solicitation until the home agent + stops defending the home address. + + Neighbor Solicitation by the mobile node for the home agent's address + will normally not be necessary, since the mobile node has already + learned the home agent's link-layer address from a Source Link-Layer + Address option in a Router Advertisement. However, if there are + multiple home agents it may still be necessary to send a + solicitation. In this special case of the mobile node returning + home, the mobile node MUST multicast the packet, and in addition set + the Source Address of this Neighbor Solicitation to the unspecified + address (0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0). The target of the Neighbor Solicitation + MUST be set to the mobile node's home address. The destination IP + address MUST be set to the Solicited-Node multicast address [3]. The + home agent will send a multicast Neighbor Advertisement back to the + mobile node with the Solicited flag (S) set to zero. In any case, + the mobile node SHOULD record the information from the Source Link- + Layer Address option or from the advertisement, and set the state of + the Neighbor Cache entry for the home agent to REACHABLE. + + The mobile node then sends its Binding Update to the home agent's + link-layer address, instructing its home agent to no longer serve as + a home agent for it. By processing this Binding Update, the home + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 124] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + agent will cease defending the mobile node's home address for + Duplicate Address Detection and will no longer respond to Neighbor + Solicitations for the mobile node's home address. The mobile node is + then the only node on the link receiving packets at the mobile node's + home address. In addition, when returning home prior to the + expiration of a current binding for its home address, and configuring + its home address on its network interface on its home link, the + mobile node MUST NOT perform Duplicate Address Detection on its own + home address, in order to avoid confusion or conflict with its home + agent's use of the same address. This rule also applies to the + derived link-local address of the mobile node, if the Link Local + Address Compatibility (L) bit was set when the binding was created. + If the mobile node returns home after the bindings for all of its + care-of addresses have expired, then it SHOULD perform DAD. + + After the Mobile Node sends the Binding Update, it MUST be prepared + to reply to Neighbor Solicitations for its home address. Such + replies MUST be sent using a unicast Neighbor Advertisement to the + sender's link-layer address. It is necessary to reply, since sending + the Binding Acknowledgement from the home agent may require + performing Neighbor Discovery, and the mobile node may not be able to + distinguish Neighbor Solicitations coming from the home agent from + other Neighbor Solicitations. Note that a race condition exists + where both the mobile node and the home agent respond to the same + solicitations sent by other nodes; this will be only temporary, + however, until the Binding Update is accepted. + + After receiving the Binding Acknowledgement for its Binding Update to + its home agent, the mobile node MUST multicast onto the home link (to + the all-nodes multicast address) a Neighbor Advertisement [12], to + advertise the mobile node's own link-layer address for its own home + address. The Target Address in this Neighbor Advertisement MUST be + set to the mobile node's home address, and the Advertisement MUST + include a Target Link-layer Address option specifying the mobile + node's link-layer address. The mobile node MUST multicast such a + Neighbor Advertisement for each of its home addresses, as defined by + the current on-link prefixes, including its link-local address and + site-local address. The Solicited Flag (S) in these Advertisements + MUST NOT be set, since they were not solicited by any Neighbor + Solicitation. The Override Flag (O) in these Advertisements MUST be + set, indicating that the Advertisements SHOULD override any existing + Neighbor Cache entries at any node receiving them. + + Since multicasting on the local link (such as Ethernet) is typically + not guaranteed to be reliable, the mobile node MAY retransmit these + Neighbor Advertisements [12] up to MAX_NEIGHBOR_ADVERTISEMENT times + to increase their reliability. It is still possible that some nodes + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 125] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + on the home link will not receive any of these Neighbor + Advertisements, but these nodes will eventually be able to recover + through use of Neighbor Unreachability Detection [12]. + + Note that the tunnel via the home agent typically stops operating at + the same time that the home registration is deleted. + +11.6. Return Routability Procedure + + This section defines the rules that the mobile node must follow when + performing the return routability procedure. Section 11.7.2 + describes the rules when the return routability procedure needs to be + initiated. + +11.6.1. Sending Test Init Messages + + A mobile node that initiates a return routability procedure MUST send + (in parallel) a Home Test Init message and a Care-of Test Init + messages. However, if the mobile node has recently received (see + Section 5.2.7) one or both home or care-of keygen tokens, and + associated nonce indices for the desired addresses, it MAY reuse + them. Therefore, the return routability procedure may in some cases + be completed with only one message pair. It may even be completed + without any messages at all, if the mobile node has a recent home + keygen token and has previously visited the same care-of address so + that it also has a recent care-of keygen token. If the mobile node + intends to send a Binding Update with the Lifetime set to zero and + the care-of address equal to its home address - such as when + returning home - sending a Home Test Init message is sufficient. In + this case, generation of the binding management key depends + exclusively on the home keygen token (Section 5.2.5). + + A Home Test Init message MUST be created as described in Section + 6.1.3. + + A Care-of Test Init message MUST be created as described in Section + 6.1.4. When sending a Home Test Init or Care-of Test Init message + the mobile node MUST record in its Binding Update List the following + fields from the messages: + + o The IP address of the node to which the message was sent. + + o The home address of the mobile node. This value will appear in + the Source Address field of the Home Test Init message. When + sending the Care-of Test Init message, this address does not + appear in the message, but represents the home address for which + the binding is desired. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 126] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The time at which each of these messages was sent. + + o The cookies used in the messages. + + Note that a single Care-of Test Init message may be sufficient even + when there are multiple home addresses. In this case the mobile node + MAY record the same information in multiple Binding Update List + entries. + +11.6.2. Receiving Test Messages + + Upon receiving a packet carrying a Home Test message, a mobile node + MUST validate the packet according to the following tests: + + o The Source Address of the packet belongs to a correspondent node + for which the mobile node has a Binding Update List entry with a + state indicating that return routability procedure is in progress. + Note that there may be multiple such entries. + + o The Binding Update List indicates that no home keygen token has + been received yet. + + o The Destination Address of the packet has the home address of the + mobile node, and the packet has been received in a tunnel from the + home agent. + + o The Home Init Cookie field in the message matches the value stored + in the Binding Update List. + + Any Home Test message not satisfying all of these tests MUST be + silently ignored. Otherwise, the mobile node MUST record the Home + Nonce Index and home keygen token in the Binding Update List. If the + Binding Update List entry does not have a care-of keygen token, the + mobile node SHOULD continue waiting for the Care-of Test message. + + Upon receiving a packet carrying a Care-of Test message, a mobile + node MUST validate the packet according to the following tests: + + o The Source Address of the packet belongs to a correspondent node + for which the mobile node has a Binding Update List entry with a + state indicating that return routability procedure is in progress. + Note that there may be multiple such entries. + + o The Binding Update List indicates that no care-of keygen token has + been received yet. + + o The Destination Address of the packet is the current care-of + address of the mobile node. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 127] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The Care-of Init Cookie field in the message matches the value + stored in the Binding Update List. + + Any Care-of Test message not satisfying all of these tests MUST be + silently ignored. Otherwise, the mobile node MUST record the Care-of + Nonce Index and care-of keygen token in the Binding Update List. If + the Binding Update List entry does not have a home keygen token, the + mobile node SHOULD continue waiting for the Home Test message. + + If after receiving either the Home Test or the Care-of Test message + and performing the above actions, the Binding Update List entry has + both the home and the care-of keygen tokens, the return routability + procedure is complete. The mobile node SHOULD then proceed with + sending a Binding Update as described in Section 11.7.2. + + Correspondent nodes from the time before this specification was + published may not support the Mobility Header protocol. These nodes + will respond to Home Test Init and Care-of Test Init messages with an + ICMP Parameter Problem code 1. The mobile node SHOULD take such + messages as an indication that the correspondent node cannot provide + route optimization, and revert back to the use of bidirectional + tunneling. + +11.6.3. Protecting Return Routability Packets + + The mobile node MUST support the protection of Home Test and Home + Test Init messages as described in Section 10.4.6. + + When IPsec is used to protect return routability signaling or payload + packets, the mobile node MUST set the source address it uses for the + outgoing tunnel packets to the current primary care-of address. The + mobile node starts to use a new primary care-of address immediately + after sending a Binding Update to the home agent to register this new + address. + +11.7. Processing Bindings + +11.7.1. Sending Binding Updates to the Home Agent + + After deciding to change its primary care-of address as described in + Section 11.5.1 and Section 11.5.2, a mobile node MUST register this + care-of address with its home agent in order to make this its primary + care-of address. + + Also, if the mobile node wants the services of the home agent beyond + the current registration period, the mobile node should send a new + Binding Update to it well before the expiration of this period, even + if it is not changing its primary care-of address. However, if the + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 128] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + home agent returned a Binding Acknowledgement for the current + registration with Status field set to 1 (accepted but prefix + discovery necessary), the mobile node should not try to register + again before it has learned the validity of its home prefixes through + mobile prefix discovery. This is typically necessary every time this + Status value is received, because information learned earlier may + have changed. + + To register a care-of address or to extend the lifetime of an + existing registration, the mobile node sends a packet to its home + agent containing a Binding Update, with the packet constructed as + follows: + + o The Home Registration (H) bit MUST be set in the Binding Update. + + o The Acknowledge (A) bit MUST be set in the Binding Update. + + o The packet MUST contain a Home Address destination option, giving + the mobile node's home address for the binding. + + o The care-of address for the binding MUST be used as the Source + Address in the packet's IPv6 header, unless an Alternate Care-of + Address mobility option is included in the Binding Update. This + option MUST be included in all home registrations, as the ESP + protocol will not be able to protect care-of addresses in the IPv6 + header. (Mobile IPv6 implementations that know they are using + IPsec AH to protect a particular message might avoid this option. + For brevity the usage of AH is not discussed in this document.) + + o If the mobile node's link-local address has the same interface + identifier as the home address for which it is supplying a new + care-of address, then the mobile node SHOULD set the Link-Local + Address Compatibility (L) bit. + + o If the home address was generated using RFC 3041 [18], then the + link local address is unlikely to have a compatible interface + identifier. In this case, the mobile node MUST clear the Link- + Local Address Compatibility (L) bit. + + o If the IPsec security associations between the mobile node and the + home agent have been established dynamically, and the mobile node + has the capability to update its endpoint in the used key + management protocol to the new care-of address every time it + moves, the mobile node SHOULD set the Key Management Mobility + Capability (K) bit in the Binding Update. Otherwise, the mobile + node MUST clear the bit. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 129] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The value specified in the Lifetime field MUST be non-zero and + SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining valid lifetime of + the home address and the care-of address specified for the + binding. + + Mobile nodes that use dynamic home agent address discovery should + be careful with long lifetimes. If the mobile node loses the + knowledge of its binding with a specific home agent, registering a + new binding with another home agent may be impossible as the + previous home agent is still defending the existing binding. + Therefore, to ensure that mobile nodes using home agent address + discovery do not lose information about their binding, they SHOULD + de-register before losing this information, or use small + lifetimes. + + The Acknowledge (A) bit in the Binding Update requests the home agent + to return a Binding Acknowledgement in response to this Binding + Update. As described in Section 6.1.8, the mobile node SHOULD + retransmit this Binding Update to its home agent until it receives a + matching Binding Acknowledgement. Once reaching a retransmission + timeout period of MAX_BINDACK_TIMEOUT, the mobile node SHOULD restart + the process of delivering the Binding Update, but trying instead the + next home agent returned during dynamic home agent address discovery + (see Section 11.4.1). If there was only one home agent, the mobile + node instead SHOULD continue to periodically retransmit the Binding + Update at this rate until acknowledged (or until it begins attempting + to register a different primary care-of address). See Section 11.8 + for information about retransmitting Binding Updates. + + With the Binding Update, the mobile node requests the home agent to + serve as the home agent for the given home address. Until the + lifetime of this registration expires, the home agent considers + itself the home agent for this home address. + + Each Binding Update MUST be authenticated as coming from the right + mobile node, as defined in Section 5.1. The mobile node MUST use its + home address - either in the Home Address destination option or in + the Source Address field of the IPv6 header - in Binding Updates sent + to the home agent. This is necessary in order to allow the IPsec + policies to be matched with the correct home address. + + When sending a Binding Update to its home agent, the mobile node MUST + also create or update the corresponding Binding Update List entry, as + specified in Section 11.7.2. + + The last Sequence Number value sent to the home agent in a Binding + Update is stored by the mobile node. If the sending mobile node has + no knowledge of the correct Sequence Number value, it may start at + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 130] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + any value. If the home agent rejects the value, it sends back a + Binding Acknowledgement with a status code 135, and the last accepted + sequence number in the Sequence Number field of the Binding + Acknowledgement. The mobile node MUST store this information and use + the next Sequence Number value for the next Binding Update it sends. + + If the mobile node has additional home addresses, then the mobile + node SHOULD send an additional packet containing a Binding Update to + its home agent to register the care-of address for each such other + home address. + + The home agent will only perform DAD for the mobile node's home + address when the mobile node has supplied a valid binding between its + home address and a care-of address. If some time elapses during + which the mobile node has no binding at the home agent, it might be + possible for another node to autoconfigure the mobile node's home + address. Therefore, the mobile node MUST treat the creation of a new + binding with the home agent using an existing home address, the same + as creation of a new home address. In the unlikely event that the + mobile node's home address is autoconfigured as the IPv6 address of + another network node on the home network, the home agent will reply + to the mobile node's subsequent Binding Update with a Binding + Acknowledgement containing a Status of 134 (Duplicate Address + Detection failed). In this case, the mobile node MUST NOT attempt to + re-use the same home address. It SHOULD continue to register the + care-of addresses for its other home addresses, if any. (Mechanisms + outlined in Appendix B.5 may in the future allow mobile nodes to + acquire new home addresses to replace the one for which Status 134 + was received.) + +11.7.2. Correspondent Registration + + When the mobile node is assured that its home address is valid, it + can initiate a correspondent registration with the purpose of + allowing the correspondent node to cache the mobile node's current + care-of address. This procedure consists of the return routability + procedure followed by a registration. + + This section defines when the correspondent registration is to be + initiated and the rules to follow while it is being performed. + + After the mobile node has sent a Binding Update to its home agent, + registering a new primary care-of address (as described in Section + 11.7.1), the mobile node SHOULD initiate a correspondent registration + for each node that already appears in the mobile node's Binding + Update List. The initiated procedures can be used to either update + or delete binding information in the correspondent node. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 131] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + For nodes that do not appear in the mobile node's Binding Update + List, the mobile node MAY initiate a correspondent registration at + any time after sending the Binding Update to its home agent. + + Considerations regarding when (and if) to initiate the procedure + depend on the specific movement and traffic patterns of the mobile + node and are outside the scope of this document. + + In addition, the mobile node MAY initiate the correspondent + registration in response to receiving a packet that meets all of the + following tests: + + o The packet was tunneled using IPv6 encapsulation. + + o The Destination Address in the tunnel (outer) IPv6 header is equal + to any of the mobile node's care-of addresses. + + o The Destination Address in the original (inner) IPv6 header is + equal to one of the mobile node's home addresses. + + o The Source Address in the tunnel (outer) IPv6 header differs from + the Source Address in the original (inner) IPv6 header. + + o The packet does not contain a Home Test, Home Test Init, Care-of + Test, or Care-of Test Init message. + + If a mobile node has multiple home addresses, it becomes important to + select the right home address to use in the correspondent + registration. The used home address MUST be the Destination Address + of the original (inner) packet. + + The peer address used in the procedure MUST be determined as follows: + + o If a Home Address destination option is present in the original + (inner) packet, the address from this option is used. + + o Otherwise, the Source Address in the original (inner) IPv6 header + of the packet is used. + + Note that the validity of the original packet is checked before + attempting to initiate a correspondent registration. For instance, + if a Home Address destination option appeared in the original packet, + then rules in Section 9.3.1 are followed. + + A mobile node MAY also choose to keep its topological location + private from certain correspondent nodes, and thus need not initiate + the correspondent registration. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 132] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Upon successfully completing the return routability procedure, and + after receiving a successful Binding Acknowledgement from the Home + Agent, a Binding Update MAY be sent to the correspondent node. + + In any Binding Update sent by a mobile node, the care-of address + (either the Source Address in the packet's IPv6 header or the Care-of + Address in the Alternate Care-of Address mobility option of the + Binding Update) MUST be set to one of the care-of addresses currently + in use by the mobile node or to the mobile node's home address. A + mobile node MAY set the care-of address differently for sending + Binding Updates to different correspondent nodes. + + A mobile node MAY also send a Binding Update to such a correspondent + node, instructing it to delete any existing binding for the mobile + node from its Binding Cache, as described in Section 6.1.7. Even in + this case a successful completion of the return routability procedure + is required first. + + If the care-of address is not set to the mobile node's home address, + the Binding Update requests that the correspondent node create or + update an entry for the mobile node in the correspondent node's + Binding Cache. This is done in order to record a care-of address for + use in sending future packets to the mobile node. In this case, the + value specified in the Lifetime field sent in the Binding Update + SHOULD be less than or equal to the remaining lifetime of the home + registration and the care-of address specified for the binding. The + care-of address given in the Binding Update MAY differ from the + mobile node's primary care-of address. + + If the Binding Update is sent to the correspondent node, requesting + the deletion of any existing Binding Cache entry it has for the + mobile node, the care-of address is set to the mobile node's home + address and the Lifetime field set to zero. In this case, generation + of the binding management key depends exclusively on the home keygen + token (Section 5.2.5). The care-of nonce index SHOULD be set to zero + in this case. In keeping with the Binding Update creation rules + below, the care-of address MUST be set to the home address if the + mobile node is at home, or to the current care-of address if it is + away from home. + + If the mobile node wants to ensure that its new care-of address has + been entered into a correspondent node's Binding Cache, the mobile + node needs to request an acknowledgement by setting the Acknowledge + (A) bit in the Binding Update. + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 133] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + A Binding Update is created as follows: + + o The current care-of address of the mobile node MUST be sent either + in the Source Address of the IPv6 header, or in the Alternate + Care-of Address mobility option. + + o The Destination Address of the IPv6 header MUST contain the + address of the correspondent node. + + o The Mobility Header is constructed according to rules in Section + 6.1.7 and Section 5.2.6, including the Binding Authorization Data + (calculated as defined in Section 6.2.7) and possibly the Nonce + Indices mobility options. + + o The home address of the mobile node MUST be added to the packet in + a Home Address destination option, unless the Source Address is + the home address. + + Each Binding Update MUST have a Sequence Number greater than the + Sequence Number value sent in the previous Binding Update to the same + destination address (if any). The sequence numbers are compared + modulo 2**16, as described in Section 9.5.1. There is no + requirement, however, that the Sequence Number value strictly + increase by 1 with each new Binding Update sent or received, as long + as the value stays within the window. The last Sequence Number value + sent to a destination in a Binding Update is stored by the mobile + node in its Binding Update List entry for that destination. If the + sending mobile node has no Binding Update List entry, the Sequence + Number SHOULD start at a random value. The mobile node MUST NOT use + the same Sequence Number in two different Binding Updates to the same + correspondent node, even if the Binding Updates provide different + care-of addresses. + + The mobile node is responsible for the completion of the + correspondent registration, as well as any retransmissions that may + be needed (subject to the rate limitation defined in Section 11.8). + +11.7.3. Receiving Binding Acknowledgements + + Upon receiving a packet carrying a Binding Acknowledgement, a mobile + node MUST validate the packet according to the following tests: + + o The packet meets the authentication requirements for Binding + Acknowledgements defined in Section 6.1.8 and Section 5. That is, + if the Binding Update was sent to the home agent, underlying IPsec + protection is used. If the Binding Update was sent to the + correspondent node, the Binding Authorization Data mobility option + MUST be present and have a valid value. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 134] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o The Binding Authorization Data mobility option, if present, MUST + be the last option and MUST not have trailing padding. + + o The Sequence Number field matches the Sequence Number sent by the + mobile node to this destination address in an outstanding Binding + Update. + + Any Binding Acknowledgement not satisfying all of these tests MUST be + silently ignored. + + When a mobile node receives a packet carrying a valid Binding + Acknowledgement, the mobile node MUST examine the Status field as + follows: + + o If the Status field indicates that the Binding Update was accepted + (the Status field is less than 128), then the mobile node MUST + update the corresponding entry in its Binding Update List to + indicate that the Binding Update has been acknowledged; the mobile + node MUST then stop retransmitting the Binding Update. In + addition, if the value specified in the Lifetime field in the + Binding Acknowledgement is less than the Lifetime value sent in + the Binding Update being acknowledged, the mobile node MUST + subtract the difference between these two Lifetime values from the + remaining lifetime for the binding as maintained in the + corresponding Binding Update List entry (with a minimum value for + the Binding Update List entry lifetime of 0). That is, if the + Lifetime value sent in the Binding Update was L_update, the + Lifetime value received in the Binding Acknowledgement was L_ack, + and the current remaining lifetime of the Binding Update List + entry is L_remain, then the new value for the remaining lifetime + of the Binding Update List entry should be + + max((L_remain - (L_update - L_ack)), 0) + + where max(X, Y) is the maximum of X and Y. The effect of this + step is to correctly manage the mobile node's view of the + binding's remaining lifetime (as maintained in the corresponding + Binding Update List entry) so that it correctly counts down from + the Lifetime value given in the Binding Acknowledgement, but with + the timer countdown beginning at the time that the Binding Update + was sent. + + Mobile nodes SHOULD send a new Binding Update well before the + expiration of this period in order to extend the lifetime. This + helps to avoid disruptions in communications which might otherwise + be caused by network delays or clock drift. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 135] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o Additionally, if the Status field value is 1 (accepted but prefix + discovery necessary), the mobile node SHOULD send a Mobile Prefix + Solicitation message to update its information about the available + prefixes. + + o If the Status field indicates that the Binding Update was rejected + (the Status field is greater than or equal to 128), then the + mobile node can take steps to correct the cause of the error and + retransmit the Binding Update (with a new Sequence Number value), + subject to the rate limiting restriction specified in Section + 11.8. If this is not done or it fails, then the mobile node + SHOULD record in its Binding Update List that future Binding + Updates SHOULD NOT be sent to this destination. + + The treatment of a Binding Refresh Advice mobility option within the + Binding Acknowledgement depends on where the acknowledgement came + from. This option MUST be ignored if the acknowledgement came from a + correspondent node. If it came from the home agent, the mobile node + uses the Refresh Interval field in the option as a suggestion that it + SHOULD attempt to refresh its home registration at the indicated + shorter interval. + + If the acknowledgement came from the home agent, the mobile node + examines the value of the Key Management Mobility Capability (K) bit. + If this bit is not set, the mobile node SHOULD discard key management + protocol connections, if any, to the home agent. The mobile node MAY + also initiate a new key management connection. + + If this bit is set, the mobile node SHOULD move its own endpoint in + the key management protocol connections to the home agent, if any. + The mobile node's new endpoint should be the new care-of address. + For an IKE phase 1 connection, this means that packets sent to this + address with the original ISAKMP cookies are accepted. + +11.7.4. Receiving Binding Refresh Requests + + When a mobile node receives a packet containing a Binding Refresh + Request message, the mobile node has a Binding Update List entry for + the source of the Binding Refresh Request, and the mobile node wants + to retain its binding cache entry at the correspondent node, then the + mobile node should start a return routability procedure. If the + mobile node wants to have its binding cache entry removed, it can + either ignore the Binding Refresh Request and wait for the binding to + time out, or at any time, it can delete its binding from a + correspondent node with an explicit binding update with a zero + lifetime and the care-of address set to the home address. If the + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 136] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + mobile node does not know if it needs the binding cache entry, it can + make the decision in an implementation dependent manner, such as + based on available resources. + + Note that the mobile node should be careful to not respond to Binding + Refresh Requests for addresses not in the Binding Update List to + avoid being subjected to a denial of service attack. + + If the return routability procedure completes successfully, a Binding + Update message SHOULD be sent, as described in Section 11.7.2. The + Lifetime field in this Binding Update SHOULD be set to a new + lifetime, extending any current lifetime remaining from a previous + Binding Update sent to this node (as indicated in any existing + Binding Update List entry for this node), and the lifetime SHOULD + again be less than or equal to the remaining lifetime of the home + registration and the care-of address specified for the binding. When + sending this Binding Update, the mobile node MUST update its Binding + Update List in the same way as for any other Binding Update sent by + the mobile node. + +11.8. Retransmissions and Rate Limiting + + The mobile node is responsible for retransmissions and rate limiting + in the return routability procedure, registrations, and in solicited + prefix discovery. + + When the mobile node sends a Mobile Prefix Solicitation, Home Test + Init, Care-of Test Init or Binding Update for which it expects a + response, the mobile node has to determine a value for the initial + retransmission timer: + + o If the mobile node is sending a Mobile Prefix Solicitation, it + SHOULD use an initial retransmission interval of + INITIAL_SOLICIT_TIMER (see Section 12). + + o If the mobile node is sending a Binding Update and does not have + an existing binding at the home agent, it SHOULD use + InitialBindackTimeoutFirstReg (see Section 13) as a value for the + initial retransmission timer. This long retransmission interval + will allow the home agent to complete the Duplicate Address + Detection procedure mandated in this case, as detailed in Section + 11.7.1. + + o Otherwise, the mobile node should use the specified value of + INITIAL_BINDACK_TIMEOUT for the initial retransmission timer. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 137] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + If the mobile node fails to receive a valid matching response within + the selected initial retransmission interval, the mobile node SHOULD + retransmit the message until a response is received. + + The retransmissions by the mobile node MUST use an exponential back- + off process in which the timeout period is doubled upon each + retransmission, until either the node receives a response or the + timeout period reaches the value MAX_BINDACK_TIMEOUT. The mobile + node MAY continue to send these messages at this slower rate + indefinitely. + + The mobile node SHOULD start a separate back-off process for + different message types, different home addresses and different + care-of addresses. However, in addition an overall rate limitation + applies for messages sent to a particular correspondent node. This + ensures that the correspondent node has a sufficient amount of time + to respond when bindings for multiple home addresses are registered, + for instance. The mobile node MUST NOT send Mobility Header messages + of a particular type to a particular correspondent node more than + MAX_UPDATE_RATE times within a second. + + Retransmitted Binding Updates MUST use a Sequence Number value + greater than that used for the previous transmission of this Binding + Update. Retransmitted Home Test Init and Care-of Test Init messages + MUST use new cookie values. + +12. Protocol Constants + + DHAAD_RETRIES 4 retransmissions + INITIAL_BINDACK_TIMEOUT 1 second + INITIAL_DHAAD_TIMEOUT 3 seconds + INITIAL_SOLICIT_TIMER 3 seconds + MAX_BINDACK_TIMEOUT 32 seconds + MAX_NONCE_LIFETIME 240 seconds + MAX_TOKEN_LIFETIME 210 seconds + MAX_RR_BINDING_LIFETIME 420 seconds + MAX_UPDATE_RATE 3 times + PREFIX_ADV_RETRIES 3 retransmissions + PREFIX_ADV_TIMEOUT 3 seconds + +13. Protocol Configuration Variables + + MaxMobPfxAdvInterval Default: 86,400 seconds + MinDelayBetweenRAs Default: 3 seconds, + Min: 0.03 seconds + MinMobPfxAdvInterval Default: 600 seconds + InitialBindackTimeoutFirstReg Default: 1.5 seconds + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 138] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Home agents MUST allow the first three variables to be configured by + system management, and mobile nodes MUST allow the last variable to + be configured by system management. + + The default value for InitialBindackTimeoutFirstReg has been + calculated as 1.5 times the default value of RetransTimer [12] times + the default value of DupAddrDetectTransmits [13]. + + The value MinDelayBetweenRAs overrides the value of the protocol + constant MIN_DELAY_BETWEEN_RAS, as specified in RFC 2461 [12]. This + variable SHOULD be set to MinRtrAdvInterval, if MinRtrAdvInterval is + less than 3 seconds. + +14. IANA Considerations + + This document defines a new IPv6 protocol, the Mobility Header, + described in Section 6.1. This protocol has been assigned protocol + number 135. + + This document also creates a new name space "Mobility Header Type", + for the MH Type field in the Mobility Header. The current message + types are described starting from Section 6.1.2, and are the + following: + + 0 Binding Refresh Request + + 1 Home Test Init + + 2 Care-of Test Init + + 3 Home Test + + 4 Care-of Test + + 5 Binding Update + + 6 Binding Acknowledgement + + 7 Binding Error + + Future values of the MH Type can be allocated using Standards Action + or IESG Approval [10]. + + Furthermore, each mobility message may contain mobility options as + described in Section 6.2. This document defines a new name space + "Mobility Option" to identify these options. The current mobility + options are defined starting from Section 6.2.2 and are the + following: + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 139] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + 0 Pad1 + + 1 PadN + + 2 Binding Refresh Advice + + 3 Alternate Care-of Address + + 4 Nonce Indices + + 5 Authorization Data + + Future values of the Option Type can be allocated using Standards + Action or IESG Approval [10]. + + Finally, this document creates a third new name space "Status Code" + for the Status field in the Binding Acknowledgement message. The + current values are described in Section 6.1.8, and are the following: + + 0 Binding Update accepted + + 1 Accepted but prefix discovery necessary + + 128 Reason unspecified + + 129 Administratively prohibited + + 130 Insufficient resources + + 131 Home registration not supported + + 132 Not home subnet + + 133 Not home agent for this mobile node + + 134 Duplicate Address Detection failed + + 135 Sequence number out of window + + 136 Expired home nonce index + + 137 Expired care-of nonce index + + 138 Expired nonces + + 139 Registration type change disallowed + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 140] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Future values of the Status field can be allocated using Standards + Action or IESG Approval [10]. + + All fields labeled "Reserved" are only to be assigned through + Standards Action or IESG Approval. + + This document also defines a new IPv6 destination option, the Home + Address option, described in Section 6.3. This option has been + assigned the Option Type value 0xC9. + + This document also defines a new IPv6 type 2 routing header, + described in Section 6.4. The value 2 has been allocated by IANA. + + In addition, this document defines four ICMP message types, two used + as part of the dynamic home agent address discovery mechanism, and + two used in lieu of Router Solicitations and Advertisements when the + mobile node is away from the home link. These messages have been + assigned ICMPv6 type numbers from the informational message range: + + o The Home Agent Address Discovery Request message, described in + Section 6.5; + + o The Home Agent Address Discovery Reply message, described in + Section 6.6; + + o The Mobile Prefix Solicitation, described in Section 6.7; and + + o The Mobile Prefix Advertisement, described in Section 6.8. + + This document also defines two new Neighbor Discovery [12] options, + which have been assigned Option Type values within the option + numbering space for Neighbor Discovery messages: + + o The Advertisement Interval option, described in Section 7.3; and + + o The Home Agent Information option, described in Section 7.4. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 141] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +15. Security Considerations + +15.1. Threats + + Any mobility solution must protect itself against misuses of the + mobility features and mechanisms. In Mobile IPv6, most of the + potential threats are concerned with false Bindings, usually + resulting in Denial-of-Service attacks. Some of the threats also + pose potential for Man-in-the-Middle, Hijacking, Confidentiality, and + Impersonation attacks. The main threats this protocol protects + against are the following: + + o Threats involving Binding Updates sent to home agents and + correspondent nodes. For instance, an attacker might claim that a + certain mobile node is currently at a different location than it + really is. If a home agent accepts such spoofed information sent + to it, the mobile node might not get traffic destined to it. + Similarly, a malicious (mobile) node might use the home address of + a victim node in a forged Binding Update sent to a correspondent + node. + + These pose threats against confidentiality, integrity, and + availability. That is, an attacker might learn the contents of + packets destined to another node by redirecting the traffic to + itself. Furthermore, an attacker might use the redirected packets + in an attempt to set itself as a Man-in-the-Middle between a + mobile and a correspondent node. This would allow the attacker to + impersonate the mobile node, leading to integrity and availability + problems. + + A malicious (mobile) node might also send Binding Updates in which + the care-of address is set to the address of a victim node. If + such Binding Updates were accepted, the malicious node could lure + the correspondent node into sending potentially large amounts of + data to the victim; the correspondent node's replies to messages + sent by the malicious mobile node will be sent to the victim host + or network. This could be used to cause a Distributed Denial-of- + Service attack. For example, the correspondent node might be a + site that will send a high-bandwidth stream of video to anyone who + asks for it. Note that the use of flow-control protocols such as + TCP does not necessarily defend against this type of attack, + because the attacker can fake the acknowledgements. Even keeping + TCP initial sequence numbers secret does not help, because the + attacker can receive the first few segments (including the ISN) at + its own address, and only then redirect the stream to the victim's + address. These types of attacks may also be directed to networks + instead of nodes. Further variations of this threat are described + elsewhere [27, 34]. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 142] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + An attacker might also attempt to disrupt a mobile node's + communications by replaying a Binding Update that the node had + sent earlier. If the old Binding Update was accepted, packets + destined for the mobile node would be sent to its old location as + opposed to its current location. + + In conclusion, there are Denial-of-Service, Man-in-the-Middle, + Confidentiality, and Impersonation threats against the parties + involved in sending legitimate Binding Updates, and Denial-of- + Service threats against any other party. + + o Threats associated with payload packets: Payload packets exchanged + with mobile nodes are exposed to similar threats as that of + regular IPv6 traffic. However, Mobile IPv6 introduces the Home + Address destination option, a new routing header type (type 2), + and uses tunneling headers in the payload packets. The protocol + must protect against potential new threats involving the use of + these mechanisms. + + Third parties become exposed to a reflection threat via the Home + Address destination option, unless appropriate security + precautions are followed. The Home Address destination option + could be used to direct response traffic toward a node whose IP + address appears in the option. In this case, ingress filtering + would not catch the forged "return address" [36, 32]. + + A similar threat exists with the tunnels between the mobile node + and the home agent. An attacker might forge tunnel packets + between the mobile node and the home agent, making it appear that + the traffic is coming from the mobile node when it is not. Note + that an attacker who is able to forge tunnel packets would + typically also be able to forge packets that appear to come + directly from the mobile node. This is not a new threat as such. + However, it may make it easier for attackers to escape detection + by avoiding ingress filtering and packet tracing mechanisms. + Furthermore, spoofed tunnel packets might be used to gain access + to the home network. + + Finally, a routing header could also be used in reflection + attacks, and in attacks designed to bypass firewalls. The + generality of the regular routing header would allow circumvention + of IP-address based rules in firewalls. It would also allow + reflection of traffic to other nodes. These threats exist with + routing headers in general, even if the usage that Mobile IPv6 + requires is safe. + + o Threats associated with dynamic home agent and mobile prefix + discovery. + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 143] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o Threats against the Mobile IPv6 security mechanisms themselves: An + attacker might, for instance, lure the participants into executing + expensive cryptographic operations or allocating memory for the + purpose of keeping state. The victim node would have no resources + left to handle other tasks. + + As a fundamental service in an IPv6 stack, Mobile IPv6 is expected to + be deployed in most nodes of the IPv6 Internet. The above threats + should therefore be considered as being applicable to the whole + Internet. + + It should also be noted that some additional threats result from + movements as such, even without the involvement of mobility + protocols. Mobile nodes must be capable to defend themselves in the + networks that they visit, as typical perimeter defenses applied in + the home network no longer protect them. + +15.2. Features + + This specification provides a series of features designed to mitigate + the risk introduced by the threats listed above. The main security + features are the following: + + o Reverse Tunneling as a mandatory feature. + + o Protection of Binding Updates sent to home agents. + + o Protection of Binding Updates sent to correspondent nodes. + + o Protection against reflection attacks that use the Home Address + destination option. + + o Protection of tunnels between the mobile node and the home agent. + + o Closing routing header vulnerabilities. + + o Mitigating Denial-of-Service threats to the Mobile IPv6 security + mechanisms themselves. + + The support for encrypted reverse tunneling (see Section 11.3.1) + allows mobile nodes to defeat certain kinds of traffic analysis. + + Protecting those Binding Updates that are sent to home agents and + those that are sent to arbitrary correspondent nodes requires very + different security solutions due to the different situations. Mobile + nodes and home agents are naturally expected to be subject to the + network administration of the home domain. + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 144] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Thus, they can and are supposed to have a security association that + can be used to reliably authenticate the exchanged messages. See + Section 5.1 for the description of the protocol mechanisms, and + Section 15.3 below for a discussion of the resulting level of + security. + + It is expected that Mobile IPv6 route optimization will be used on a + global basis between nodes belonging to different administrative + domains. It would be a very demanding task to build an + authentication infrastructure on this scale. Furthermore, a + traditional authentication infrastructure cannot be easily used to + authenticate IP addresses because IP addresses can change often. It + is not sufficient to just authenticate the mobile nodes; + Authorization to claim the right to use an address is needed as well. + Thus, an "infrastructureless" approach is necessary. The chosen + infrastructureless method is described in Section 5.2, and Section + 15.4 discusses the resulting security level and the design rationale + of this approach. + + Specific rules guide the use of the Home Address destination option, + the routing header, and the tunneling headers in the payload packets. + These rules are necessary to remove the vulnerabilities associated + with their unrestricted use. The effect of the rules is discussed in + Section 15.7, Section 15.8, and Section 15.9. + + Denial-of-Service threats against Mobile IPv6 security mechanisms + themselves concern mainly the Binding Update procedures with + correspondent nodes. The protocol has been designed to limit the + effects of such attacks, as will be described in Section 15.4.5. + +15.3. Binding Updates to Home Agent + + Signaling between the mobile node and the home agent requires message + integrity. This is necessary to assure the home agent that a Binding + Update is from a legitimate mobile node. In addition, correct + ordering and anti-replay protection are optionally needed. + + IPsec ESP protects the integrity of the Binding Updates and Binding + Acknowledgements by securing mobility messages between the mobile + node and the home agent. + + IPsec can provide anti-replay protection only if dynamic keying is + used (which may not always be the case). IPsec does not guarantee + correct ordering of packets, only that they have not been replayed. + Because of this, sequence numbers within the Mobile IPv6 messages are + used to ensure correct ordering (see Section 5.1). However, if the + 16 bit Mobile IPv6 sequence number space is cycled through, or the + home agent reboots and loses its state regarding the sequence + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 145] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + numbers, replay and reordering attacks become possible. The use of + dynamic keying, IPsec anti-replay protection, and the Mobile IPv6 + sequence numbers can together prevent such attacks. It is also + recommended that use of non-volatile storage be considered for home + agents, to avoid losing their state. + + A sliding window scheme is used for the sequence numbers. The + protection against replays and reordering attacks without a key + management mechanism works when the attacker remembers up to a + maximum of 2**15 Binding Updates. + + The above mechanisms do not show that the care-of address given in + the Binding Update is correct. This opens the possibility for + Denial-of-Service attacks against third parties. However, since the + mobile node and home agent have a security association, the home + agent can always identify an ill-behaving mobile node. This allows + the home agent operator to discontinue the mobile node's service, and + possibly take further actions based on the business relationship with + the mobile node's owner. + + Note that the use of a single pair of manually keyed security + associations conflicts with the generation of a new home address [18] + for the mobile node, or with the adoption of a new home subnet + prefix. This is because IPsec security associations are bound to the + used addresses. While certificate-based automatic keying alleviates + this problem to an extent, it is still necessary to ensure that a + given mobile node cannot send Binding Updates for the address of + another mobile node. In general, this leads to the inclusion of home + addresses in certificates in the Subject AltName field. This again + limits the introduction of new addresses without either manual or + automatic procedures to establish new certificates. Therefore, this + specification restricts the generation of new home addresses (for any + reason) to those situations where a security association or + certificate for the new address already exists. (Appendix B.4 lists + the improvement of security for new addresses as one of the future + developments for Mobile IPv6.) + + Support for IKE has been specified as optional. The following should + be observed about the use of manual keying: + + o As discussed above, with manually keyed IPsec, only a limited form + of protection exists against replay and reordering attacks. A + vulnerability exists if either the sequence number space is cycled + through, or if the home agent reboots and forgets its sequence + numbers (and uses volatile memory to store the sequence numbers). + Assuming the mobile node moves continuously every 10 minutes, it + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 146] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + takes roughly 455 days before the sequence number space has been + cycled through. Typical movement patterns rarely reach this high + frequency today. + + o A mobile node and its home agent belong to the same domain. If + this were not the case, manual keying would not be possible [28], + but in Mobile IPv6 only these two parties need to know the + manually configured keys. Similarly, we note that Mobile IPv6 + employs standard block ciphers in IPsec, and is not vulnerable to + problems associated with stream ciphers and manual keying. + + o It is expected that the owner of the mobile node and the + administrator of the home agent agree on the used keys and other + parameters with some off-line mechanism. + + The use of IKEv1 with Mobile IPv6 is documented in more detail in + [21]. The following should be observed from the use of IKEv1: + + o It is necessary to prevent a mobile node from claiming another + mobile node's home address. The home agent must verify that the + mobile node trying to negotiate the SA for a particular home + address is authorized for that home address. This implies that + even with the use of IKE, a policy entry needs to be configured + for each home address served by the home agent. + + It may be possible to include home addresses in the Subject + AltName field of certificate to avoid this. However, + implementations are not guaranteed to support the use of a + particular IP address (care-of address) while another address + (home address) appears in the certificate. In any case, even this + approach would require user-specific tasks in the certificate + authority. + + o If preshared secret authentication is used, IKEv1 main mode cannot + be used. Aggressive mode or group preshared secrets need to be + used with corresponding security implications instead. + + Note that, like many other issues, this is a general IKEv1 issue + related to the ability to use different IP addresses, and not + specifically related to Mobile IPv6. For further information, see + Section 4.4 in [21]. + + o Due to the problems outlined in Section 11.3.2, IKE phase 1 + between the mobile node and its home agent is established using + the mobile node's current care-of address. This implies that when + the mobile node moves to a new location, it may have to re- + establish phase 1. A Key Management Mobility Capability (K) flag + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 147] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + is provided for implementations that can update the IKE phase 1 + endpoints without re-establishing phase 1, but the support for + this behavior is optional. + + o When certificates are used, IKE fragmentation can occur as + discussed in Section 7 in [21]. + + o Nevertheless, even if per-mobile node configuration is required + with IKE, an important benefit of IKE is that it automates the + negotiation of cryptographic parameters, including the SPIs, + cryptographic algorithms, and so on. Thus, less configuration + information is needed. + + o The frequency of movements in some link layers or deployment + scenarios may be high enough to make replay and reordering attacks + possible, if only manual keying is used. IKE SHOULD be used in + such cases. Potentially vulnerable scenarios involve continuous + movement through small cells, or uncontrolled alternation between + available network attachment points. + + o Similarly, in some deployment scenarios the number of mobile nodes + may be very large. In these cases, it can be necessary to use + automatic mechanisms to reduce the management effort in the + administration of cryptographic parameters, even if some per- + mobile node configuration is always needed. IKE SHOULD also be + used in such cases. + + o Other automatic key management mechanisms exist beyond IKEv1, but + this document does not address the issues related to them. We + note, however, that most of the above discussion applies to IKEv2 + [30] as well, at least as it is currently specified. + +15.4. Binding Updates to Correspondent Nodes + + The motivation for designing the return routability procedure was to + have sufficient support for Mobile IPv6, without creating significant + new security problems. The goal for this procedure was not to + protect against attacks that were already possible before the + introduction of Mobile IPv6. + + The next sections will describe the security properties of the used + method, both from the point of view of possible on-path attackers who + can see those cryptographic values that have been sent in the clear + (Section 15.4.2 and Section 15.4.3) and from the point of view of + other attackers (Section 15.4.6). + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 148] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +15.4.1. Overview + + The chosen infrastructureless method verifies that the mobile node is + "live" (that is, it responds to probes) at its home and care-of + addresses. Section 5.2 describes the return routability procedure in + detail. The procedure uses the following principles: + + o A message exchange verifies that the mobile node is reachable at + its addresses, i.e., is at least able to transmit and receive + traffic at both the home and care-of addresses. + + o The eventual Binding Update is cryptographically bound to the + tokens supplied in the exchanged messages. + + o Symmetric exchanges are employed to avoid the use of this protocol + in reflection attacks. In a symmetric exchange, the responses are + always sent to the same address the request was sent from. + + o The correspondent node operates in a stateless manner until it + receives a fully authorized Binding Update. + + o Some additional protection is provided by encrypting the tunnels + between the mobile node and home agent with IPsec ESP. As the + tunnel also transports the nonce exchanges, the ability of + attackers to see these nonces is limited. For instance, this + prevents attacks from being launched from the mobile node's + current foreign link, even when no link-layer confidentiality is + available. + + The resulting level of security is in theory the same even without + this additional protection: the return routability tokens are + still exposed only to one path within the whole Internet. + However, the mobile nodes are often found on an insecure link, + such as a public access Wireless LAN. Thus, in many cases, this + addition makes a practical difference. + + For further information about the design rationale of the return + routability procedure, see [27, 34, 33, 32]. The mechanisms used + have been adopted from these documents. + +15.4.2. Achieved Security Properties + + The return routability procedure protects Binding Updates against all + attackers who are unable to monitor the path between the home agent + and the correspondent node. The procedure does not defend against + attackers who can monitor this path. Note that such attackers are in + any case able to mount an active attack against the mobile node when + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 149] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + it is at its home location. The possibility of such attacks is not + an impediment to the deployment of Mobile IPv6 because these attacks + are possible regardless of whether or not Mobile IPv6 is in use. + + This procedure also protects against Denial-of-Service attacks in + which the attacker pretends to be mobile, but uses the victim's + address as the care-of address. This would cause the correspondent + node to send the victim some unexpected traffic. This procedure + defends against these attacks by requiring at least the passive + presence of the attacker at the care-of address or on the path from + the correspondent to the care-of address. Normally, this will be the + mobile node. + +15.4.3. Comparison to Regular IPv6 Communications + + This section discusses the protection offered by the return + routability method by comparing it to the security of regular IPv6 + communications. We will divide vulnerabilities into three classes: + (1) those related to attackers on the local network of the mobile + node, home agent, or the correspondent node, (2) those related to + attackers on the path between the home network and the correspondent + node, and (3) off-path attackers, i.e., the rest of the Internet. + + We will now discuss the vulnerabilities of regular IPv6 + communications. The on-link vulnerabilities of IPv6 communications + include Denial-of-Service, Masquerading, Man-in-the-Middle, + Eavesdropping, and other attacks. These attacks can be launched + through spoofing Router Discovery, Neighbor Discovery and other IPv6 + mechanisms. Some of these attacks can be prevented with the use of + cryptographic protection in the packets. + + A similar situation exists with on-path attackers. That is, without + cryptographic protection, the traffic is completely vulnerable. + + Assuming that attackers have not penetrated the security of the + Internet routing protocols, attacks are much harder to launch from + off-path locations. Attacks that can be launched from these + locations are mainly Denial-of-Service attacks, such as flooding and/ + or reflection attacks. It is not possible for an off-path attacker + to become a Man-in-the-Middle. + + Next, we will consider the vulnerabilities that exist when IPv6 is + used together with Mobile IPv6 and the return routability procedure. + On the local link, the vulnerabilities are the same as those in IPv6, + but Masquerade and Man-in-the-Middle attacks can now also be launched + against future communications, and not just against current + communications. If a Binding Update was sent while the attacker was + present on the link, its effects remain for the lifetime of the + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 150] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + binding. This happens even if the attacker moves away from the link. + In contrast, an attacker who uses only plain IPv6 generally has to + stay on the link in order to continue the attack. Note that in order + to launch these new attacks, the IP address of the victim must be + known. This makes this attack feasible, mainly in the context of + well-known interface IDs, such as those already appearing in the + traffic on the link or registered in the DNS. + + On-path attackers can exploit similar vulnerabilities as in regular + IPv6. There are some minor differences, however. Masquerade, Man- + in-the-Middle, and Denial-of-Service attacks can be launched with + just the interception of a few packets, whereas in regular IPv6 it is + necessary to intercept every packet. The effect of the attacks is + the same regardless of the method, however. In any case, the most + difficult task an attacker faces in these attacks is getting on the + right path. + + The vulnerabilities for off-path attackers are the same as in regular + IPv6. Those nodes that are not on the path between the home agent + and the correspondent node will not be able to receive the home + address probe messages. + + In conclusion, we can state the following main results from this + comparison: + + o Return routability prevents any off-path attacks beyond those that + are already possible in regular IPv6. This is the most important + result, preventing attackers on the Internet from exploiting any + vulnerabilities. + + o Vulnerabilities to attackers on the home agent link, the + correspondent node link, and the path between them are roughly the + same as in regular IPv6. + + o However, one difference is that in basic IPv6 an on-path attacker + must be constantly present on the link or the path, whereas with + Mobile IPv6, an attacker can leave a binding behind after moving + away. + + For this reason, this specification limits the creation of + bindings to at most MAX_TOKEN_LIFETIME seconds after the last + routability check has been performed, and limits the duration of a + binding to at most MAX_RR_BINDING_LIFETIME seconds. With these + limitations, attackers cannot take any practical advantages of + this vulnerability. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 151] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + o There are some other minor differences, such as an effect to the + Denial-of-Service vulnerabilities. These can be considered to be + insignificant. + + o The path between the home agent and a correspondent node is + typically easiest to attack on the links at either end, in + particular if these links are publicly accessible wireless LANs. + + Attacks against the routers or switches on the path are typically + harder to accomplish. The security on layer 2 of the links plays + then a major role in the resulting overall network security. + Similarly, security of IPv6 Neighbor and Router Discovery on these + links has a large impact. If these were secured using some new + technology in the future, this could change the situation + regarding the easiest point of attack. + + For a more in-depth discussion of these issues, see [32]. + +15.4.4. Replay Attacks + + The return routability procedure also protects the participants + against replayed Binding Updates. The attacker is unable replay the + same message due to the sequence number which is a part of the + Binding Update. It is also unable to modify the Binding Update since + the MAC verification would fail after such a modification. + + Care must be taken when removing bindings at the correspondent node, + however. If a binding is removed while the nonce used in its + creation is still valid, an attacker could replay the old Binding + Update. Rules outlined in Section 5.2.8 ensure that this cannot + happen. + +15.4.5. Denial-of-Service Attacks + + The return routability procedure has protection against resource + exhaustion Denial-of-Service attacks. The correspondent nodes do not + retain any state about individual mobile nodes until an authentic + Binding Update arrives. This is achieved through the construct of + keygen tokens from the nonces and node keys that are not specific to + individual mobile nodes. The keygen tokens can be reconstructed by + the correspondent node, based on the home and care-of address + information that arrives with the Binding Update. This means that + the correspondent nodes are safe against memory exhaustion attacks + except where on-path attackers are concerned. Due to the use of + symmetric cryptography, the correspondent nodes are relatively safe + against CPU resource exhaustion attacks as well. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 152] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Nevertheless, as [27] describes, there are situations in which it is + impossible for the mobile and correspondent nodes to determine if + they actually need a binding or whether they just have been fooled + into believing so by an attacker. Therefore, it is necessary to + consider situations where such attacks are being made. + + Even if route optimization is a very important optimization, it is + still only an optimization. A mobile node can communicate with a + correspondent node even if the correspondent refuses to accept any + Binding Updates. However, performance will suffer because packets + from the correspondent node to the mobile node will be routed via the + mobile's home agent rather than a more direct route. A correspondent + node can protect itself against some of these resource exhaustion + attacks as follows. If the correspondent node is flooded with a + large number of Binding Updates that fail the cryptographic integrity + checks, it can stop processing Binding Updates. If a correspondent + node finds that it is spending more resources on checking bogus + Binding Updates than it is likely to save by accepting genuine + Binding Updates, then it may silently discard some or all Binding + Updates without performing any cryptographic operations. + + Layers above IP can usually provide additional information to help + decide if there is a need to establish a binding with a specific + peer. For example, TCP knows if the node has a queue of data that it + is trying to send to a peer. An implementation of this specification + is not required to make use of information from higher protocol + layers, but some implementations are likely to be able to manage + resources more effectively by making use of such information. + + We also require that all implementations be capable of + administratively disabling route optimization. + +15.4.6. Key Lengths + + Attackers can try to break the return routability procedure in many + ways. Section 15.4.2 discusses the situation where the attacker can + see the cryptographic values sent in the clear, and Section 15.4.3 + discusses the impact this has on IPv6 communications. This section + discusses whether attackers can guess the correct values without + seeing them. + + While the return routability procedure is in progress, 64 bit cookies + are used to protect spoofed responses. This is believed to be + sufficient, given that to blindly spoof a response a very large + number of messages would have to be sent before success would be + probable. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 153] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + The tokens used in the return routability procedure provide together + 128 bits of information. This information is used internally as + input to a hash function to produce a 160 bit quantity suitable for + producing the keyed hash in the Binding Update using the HMAC_SHA1 + algorithm. The final keyed hash length is 96 bits. The limiting + factors in this case are the input token lengths and the final keyed + hash length. The internal hash function application does not reduce + the entropy. + + The 96 bit final keyed hash is of typical size and is believed to be + secure. The 128 bit input from the tokens is broken in two pieces, + the home keygen token and the care-of keygen token. An attacker can + try to guess the correct cookie value, but again this would require a + large number of messages (an the average 2**63 messages for one or + 2**127 for two). Furthermore, given that the cookies are valid only + for a short period of time, the attack has to keep a high constant + message rate to achieve a lasting effect. This does not appear + practical. + + When the mobile node is returning home, it is allowed to use just the + home keygen token of 64 bits. This is less than 128 bits, but + attacking it blindly would still require a large number of messages + to be sent. If the attacker is on the path and capable of seeing the + Binding Update, it could conceivably break the keyed hash with brute + force. However, in this case the attacker has to be on the path, + which appears to offer easier ways for denial-of-service than + preventing route optimization. + +15.5. Dynamic Home Agent Address Discovery + + The dynamic home agent address discovery function could be used to + learn the addresses of home agents in the home network. + + The ability to learn addresses of nodes may be useful to attackers + because brute-force scanning of the address space is not practical + with IPv6. Thus, they could benefit from any means which make + mapping the networks easier. For example, if a security threat + targeted at routers or even home agents is discovered, having a + simple ICMP mechanism to easily find out possible targets may prove + to be an additional (though minor) security risk. + + Apart from discovering the address(es) of home agents, attackers will + not be able to learn much from this information, and mobile nodes + cannot be tricked into using wrong home agents, as all other + communication with the home agents is secure. + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 154] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +15.6. Mobile Prefix Discovery + + The mobile prefix discovery function may leak interesting information + about network topology and prefix lifetimes to eavesdroppers; for + this reason, requests for this information has to be authenticated. + Responses and unsolicited prefix information needs to be + authenticated to prevent the mobile nodes from being tricked into + believing false information about the prefixes and possibly + preventing communications with the existing addresses. Optionally, + encryption may be applied to prevent leakage of the prefix + information. + +15.7. Tunneling via the Home Agent + + Tunnels between the mobile node and the home agent can be protected + by ensuring proper use of source addresses, and optional + cryptographic protection. These procedures are discussed in Section + 5.5. + + Binding Updates to the home agents are secure. When receiving + tunneled traffic, the home agent verifies that the outer IP address + corresponds to the current location of the mobile node. This acts as + a weak form of protection against spoofing packets that appear to + come from the mobile node. This is particularly useful, if no end- + to-end security is being applied between the mobile and correspondent + nodes. The outer IP address check prevents attacks where the + attacker is controlled by ingress filtering. It also prevents + attacks when the attacker does not know the current care-of address + of the mobile node. Attackers who know the care-of address and are + not controlled by ingress filtering could still send traffic through + the home agent. This includes attackers on the same local link as + the mobile node is currently on. But such attackers could send + packets that appear to come from the mobile node without attacking + the tunnel; the attacker could simply send packets with the source + address set to the mobile node's home address. However, this attack + does not work if the final destination of the packet is in the home + network, and some form of perimeter defense is being applied for + packets sent to those destinations. In such cases it is recommended + that either end-to-end security or additional tunnel protection be + applied, as is usual in remote access situations. + + Home agents and mobile nodes may use IPsec ESP to protect payload + packets tunneled between themselves. This is useful for protecting + communications against attackers on the path of the tunnel. + + When site local home addresses are used, reverse tunneling can be + used to send site local traffic from another location. + Administrators should be aware of this when allowing such home + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 155] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + addresses. In particular, the outer IP address check described above + is not sufficient against all attackers. The use of encrypted + tunnels is particularly useful for these kinds of home addresses. + +15.8. Home Address Option + + When the mobile node sends packets directly to the correspondent + node, the Source Address field of the packet's IPv6 header is the + care-of address. Therefore, ingress filtering [26] works in the + usual manner even for mobile nodes, as the Source Address is + topologically correct. The Home Address option is used to inform the + correspondent node of the mobile node's home address. + + However, the care-of address in the Source Address field does not + survive in replies sent by the correspondent node unless it has a + binding for this mobile node. Also, not all attacker tracing + mechanisms work when packets are being reflected through + correspondent nodes using the Home Address option. For these + reasons, this specification restricts the use of the Home Address + option. It may only be used when a binding has already been + established with the participation of the node at the home address, + as described in Section 5.5 and Section 6.3. This prevents + reflection attacks through the use of the Home Address option. It + also ensures that the correspondent nodes reply to the same address + that the mobile node sends traffic from. + + No special authentication of the Home Address option is required + beyond the above, but note that if the IPv6 header of a packet is + covered by IPsec Authentication Header, then that authentication + covers the Home Address option as well. Thus, even when + authentication is used in the IPv6 header, the security of the Source + Address field in the IPv6 header is not compromised by the presence + of a Home Address option. Without authentication of the packet, any + field in the IPv6 header, including the Source Address field or any + other part of the packet and the Home Address option can be forged or + modified in transit. In this case, the contents of the Home Address + option is no more suspect than any other part of the packet. + +15.9. Type 2 Routing Header + + The definition of the type 2 routing header is described in Section + 6.4. This definition and the associated processing rules have been + chosen so that the header cannot be used for what is traditionally + viewed as source routing. In particular, the Home Address in the + routing header will always have to be assigned to the home address of + the receiving node; otherwise the packet will be dropped. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 156] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Generally, source routing has a number of security concerns. These + include the automatic reversal of unauthenticated source routes + (which is an issue for IPv4, but not for IPv6). Another concern is + the ability to use source routing to "jump" between nodes inside, as + well as outside a firewall. These security concerns are not issues + in Mobile IPv6, due to the rules mentioned above. + + In essence the semantics of the type 2 routing header is the same as + a special form of IP-in-IP tunneling where the inner and outer source + addresses are the same. + + This implies that a device which implements the filtering of packets + should be able to distinguish between a type 2 routing header and + other routing headers, as required in Section 8.3. This is necessary + in order to allow Mobile IPv6 traffic while still having the option + of filtering out other uses of routing headers. + +16. Contributors + + Tuomas Aura, Mike Roe, Greg O'Shea, Pekka Nikander, Erik Nordmark, + and Michael Thomas worked on the return routability protocols + eventually led to the procedures used in this protocol. The + procedures described in [34] were adopted in the protocol. + + Significant contributions were made by members of the Mobile IPv6 + Security Design Team, including (in alphabetical order) Gabriel + Montenegro, Erik Nordmark and Pekka Nikander. + +17. Acknowledgements + + We would like to thank the members of the Mobile IP and IPng Working + Groups for their comments and suggestions on this work. We would + particularly like to thank (in alphabetical order) Fred Baker, Josh + Broch, Samita Chakrabarti, Robert Chalmers, Noel Chiappa, Greg Daley, + Vijay Devarapalli, Rich Draves, Francis Dupont, Thomas Eklund, Jun- + Ichiro Itojun Hagino, Brian Haley, Marc Hasson, John Ioannidis, James + Kempf, Rajeev Koodli, Krishna Kumar, T.J. Kniveton, Joe Lau, Jiwoong + Lee, Aime Le Rouzic, Vesa-Matti Mantyla, Kevin Miles, Glenn Morrow, + Thomas Narten, Karen Nielsen, Simon Nybroe, David Oran, Brett + Pentland, Lars Henrik Petander, Basavaraj Patil, Mohan Parthasarathy, + Alexandru Petrescu, Mattias Petterson, Ken Powell, Phil Roberts, Ed + Remmell, Patrice Romand, Luis A. Sanchez, Jeff Schiller, Pekka + Savola, Arvind Sevalkar, Keiichi Shima, Tom Soderlund, Hesham + Soliman, Jim Solomon, Tapio Suihko, Dave Thaler, Benny Van Houdt, + Jon-Olov Vatn, Carl E. Williams, Vladislav Yasevich, Alper Yegin, and + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 157] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + Xinhua Zhao, for their detailed reviews of earlier versions of this + document. Their suggestions have helped to improve both the design + and presentation of the protocol. + + We would also like to thank the participants of the Mobile IPv6 + testing event (1999), implementors who participated in Mobile IPv6 + interoperability testing at Connectathons (2000, 2001, 2002, and + 2003), and the participants at the ETSI interoperability testing + (2000, 2002). Finally, we would like to thank the TAHI project who + has provided test suites for Mobile IPv6. + +18. References + +18.1. Normative References + + [1] Eastlake 3rd., D., Crocker, S. and J. Schiller, "Randomness + Recommendations for Security", RFC 1750, December 1994. + + [2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement + Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. + + [3] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) + Addressing Architecture", RFC 3513, April 2003. + + [4] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the + Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998. + + [5] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication Header", RFC 2402, + November 1998. + + [6] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating Security Payload + (ESP)", RFC 2406, November 1998. + + [7] Piper, D., "The Internet IP Security Domain of Interpretation + for ISAKMP", RFC 2407, November 1998. + + [8] Maughan, D., Schertler, M., Schneider, M. and J. Turner, + "Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol + (ISAKMP)", RFC 2408, November 1998. + + [9] Harkins, D. and D. Carrel, "The Internet Key Exchange (IKE)", + RFC 2409, November 1998. + + [10] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA + Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October + 1998. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 158] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + [11] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) + Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. + + [12] Narten, T., Nordmark, E. and W. Simpson, "Neighbor Discovery + for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, December 1998. + + [13] Thomson, S. and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless Address + Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462, December 1998. + + [14] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Internet Control Message Protocol + (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) + Specification", RFC 2463, December 1998. + + [15] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 + Specification", RFC 2473, December 1998. + + [16] Johnson, D. and S. Deering, "Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast + Addresses", RFC 2526, March 1999. + + [17] Deering, S., Fenner, W. and B. Haberman, "Multicast Listener + Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October 1999. + + [18] Narten, T. and R. Draves, "Privacy Extensions for Stateless + Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6", RFC 3041, January 2001. + + [19] Reynolds, J., Ed., "Assigned Numbers: RFC 1700 is Replaced by + an On-line Database", RFC 3232, January 2002. + + [20] National Institute of Standards and Technology, "Secure Hash + Standard", FIPS PUB 180-1, April 1995, <http:// + www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/fip180-1.htm>. + + [21] Arkko, J., Devarapalli, V. and F. Dupont, "Using IPsec to + Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling Between Mobile Nodes and Home + Agents", RFC 3776, June 2004. + +18.2. Informative References + + [22] Perkins, C., Ed., "IP Mobility Support for IPv4", RFC 3344, + August 2002. + + [23] Perkins, C., "IP Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2003, October + 1996. + + [24] Perkins, C., "Minimal Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2004, + October 1996. + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 159] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + + [25] Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M. and R. Canetti, "HMAC: Keyed-Hashing + for Message Authentication", RFC 2104, February 1997. + + [26] Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering: + Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source + Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000. + + [27] Aura, T. and J. Arkko, "MIPv6 BU Attacks and Defenses", Work in + Progress, March 2002. + + [28] Bellovin, S., "Guidelines for Mandating Automated Key + Management", Work in Progress, August 2003. + + [29] Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C. and + M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 + (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003. + + [30] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", Work in + Progress, April 2003. + + [31] Draves, R., "Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol + version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 3484, February 2003. + + [32] Nikander, P., Aura, T., Arkko, J., Montenegro, G. and E. + Nordmark, "Mobile IP version 6 Route Optimization Security + Design Background", Work in Progress, April 2003. + + [33] Nordmark, E., "Securing MIPv6 BUs using return routability + (BU3WAY)", Work in Progress, November 2001. + + [34] Roe, M., Aura, T., O'Shea, G. and J. Arkko, "Authentication of + Mobile IPv6 Binding Updates and Acknowledgments", Work in + Progress, March 2002. + + [35] Savola, P., "Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers + Considered Harmful", RFC 3627, September 2003. + + [36] Savola, P., "Security of IPv6 Routing Header and Home Address + Options", Work in Progress, December 2002. + + [37] Vida, R. and L. Costa, Eds., "Multicast Listener Discovery + Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004. + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 160] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +Appendix A. Future Extensions + +A.1. Piggybacking + + This document does not specify how to piggyback payload packets on + the binding related messages. However, it is envisioned that this + can be specified in a separate document when issues such as the + interaction between piggybacking and IPsec are fully resolved (see + also Appendix A.3). The return routability messages can indicate + support for piggybacking with a new mobility option. + +A.2. Triangular Routing + + Due to the concerns about opening reflection attacks with the Home + Address destination option, this specification requires that this + option be verified against the Binding Cache, i.e., there must be a + Binding Cache entry for the Home Address and Care-of Address. + + Future extensions may be specified that allow the use of unverified + Home Address destination options in ways that do not introduce + security issues. + +A.3. New Authorization Methods + + While the return routability procedure provides a good level of + security, there exist methods that have even higher levels of + security. Secondly, as discussed in Section 15.4, future + enhancements of IPv6 security may cause a need to also improve the + security of the return routability procedure. Using IPsec as the + sole method for authorizing Binding Updates to correspondent nodes is + also possible. The protection of the Mobility Header for this + purpose is easy, though one must ensure that the IPsec SA was created + with appropriate authorization to use the home address referenced in + the Binding Update. For instance, a certificate used by IKE to + create the security association might contain the home address. A + future specification may specify how this is done. + +A.4. Dynamically Generated Home Addresses + + A future version of this specification may include functionality that + allows the generation of new home addresses without requiring pre- + arranged security associations or certificates even for the new + addresses. + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 161] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +A.5. Remote Home Address Configuration + + The method for initializing a mobile node's home address upon power- + up or after an extended period of being disconnected from the network + is beyond the scope of this specification. Whatever procedure is + used should result in the mobile node having the same stateless or + stateful (e.g., DHCPv6) home address autoconfiguration information it + would have if it were attached to the home network. Due to the + possibility that the home network could be renumbered while the + mobile node is disconnected, a robust mobile node would not rely + solely on storing these addresses locally. + + Such a mobile node could be initialized by using the following + procedure: + + 1. Generate a care-of address. + + 2. Query DNS for an anycast address associated with the FQDN of the + home agent(s). + + 3. Perform home agent address discovery, and select a home agent. + + 4. Configure one home address based on the selected home agent's + subnet prefix and the interface identifier of the mobile node. + + 5. Create security associations and security policy database entries + for protecting the traffic between the selected home address and + home agent. + + 6. Perform a home registration on the selected home agent. + + 7. Perform mobile prefix discovery. + + 8. Make a decision if further home addresses need to be configured. + + This procedure is restricted to those situations where the home + prefix is 64 bits and the mobile node knows its own interface + identifier, which is also 64 bits. + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 162] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +A.6. Neighbor Discovery Extensions + + Future specifications may improve the efficiency of Neighbor + Discovery tasks, which could be helpful for fast movements. One + factor is currently being looked at: the delays caused by the + Duplicate Address Detection mechanism. Currently, Duplicate Address + Detection needs to be performed for every new care-of address as the + mobile node moves, and for the mobile node's link-local address on + every new link. In particular, the need and the trade-offs of re- + performing Duplicate Address Detection for the link-local address + every time the mobile node moves on to new links will need to be + examined. Improvements in this area are, however, generally + applicable and progress independently from the Mobile IPv6 + specification. + + Future functional improvements may also be relevant for Mobile IPv6 + and other applications. For instance, mechanisms that would allow + recovery from a Duplicate Address Detection collision would be useful + for link-local, care-of, and home addresses. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 163] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +Authors' Addresses + + David B. Johnson + Rice University + Dept. of Computer Science, MS 132 + 6100 Main Street + Houston TX 77005-1892 + USA + + EMail: dbj@cs.rice.edu + + + Charles E. Perkins + Nokia Research Center + 313 Fairchild Drive + Mountain View CA 94043 + USA + + EMail: charliep@iprg.nokia.com + + + Jari Arkko + Ericsson + 02420 Jorvas + Finland + + EMail: jari.arkko@ericsson.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 164] + +RFC 3775 Mobility Support in IPv6 June 2004 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject + to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and + except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. + + This document and the information contained herein are provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS + OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET + ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, + INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE + INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED + WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Intellectual Property + + The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any + Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to + pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in + this document or the extent to which any license under such rights + might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has + made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information + on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be + found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. + + Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any + assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an + attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of + such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this + specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at + http://www.ietf.org/ipr. + + The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any + copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary + rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement + this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- + ipr@ietf.org. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + + + +Johnson, et al. Standard Track [Page 165] + |