Transcript Future Internet Architecture for Mobility Management

Mobility Architecture in
Future Internet
AsiaFI School on Mobile/Wireless
18 January 2008
Sangheon Pack ([email protected])
Korea University
Contents
• Introduction
• Mobility in Current Internet
• Mobility in Future Internet
– Protocols
– Applications
– Mobility Models and Testbeds
• Conclusion
• References
2
Mobility in the Internet
• New generation of powerful portable devices:
– Can support most Internet needs
• Wireless speeds growing constantly:
– 4G expected to achieve 40Mbps
– WiFi up to 100Mbps
– WiMAX up to 45Mbps
– mmWave up to 3Gbps
3
Mobility Support Problem
IP Address
Identifier
4
Locator
Many Solutions
• Network Layer
– Mobile IPv4/v6
• Transport Layer
– SCTP (Stream Control Transport Protocol)
– TCP-Migrate
• Application Layer
– SIP (Session Initiation Protocol)
5
Mobile IPv4 (1/2)
Correspondent
Node
HA
Internet
FA
FA
Mobile Node
6
Mobile IPv4 (2/2)
Mobile Node
HA
FA
Agent Solicitation
Agent Advertisement
Registration Request
Registration Request
Registration Reply
Registration Reply
User Packet
User Packet
7
Correspondent
Node
Mobile IPv6
Correspondent Node
<correspondent address> <-> <home address>
<Home Address>
Mobile Node
<Correspondent Address>
Home Agent
Route
optimization
8
Bidirectional
tunnelling
<Care-Of Address>
Mobile Node
Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (1/2)
(Home address, RCoA)
HA
CN
Internet
Home BU
MAP (RCoA, LCoA)
MAP domain
Local BU
old
AR
MN
9
new
AR
MAP
Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (2/2)
(Home address, RCoA)
HA
CN
Internet
MAP (RCoA, LCoA’)
MAP domain
old
AR
Local BU
new
AR
MN
10
MAP
Many Mobile IP Variants, but…
MobileIPv4/v6
HMIPv6
Scalability
11
Adaptability
FMIPv6
Manageability
New Trends for Mobility Support
• Identifier and Locator Separation
• Network-based Mobility Management
• Scalability
• Adaptability
12
Identifier/Locator Separation (1/2)
• Host-based approaches
– Host Identity Protocol (HIP)
– Site Multi-homing by IPv6 Intermediation (SHIMv6)
• Network-based approaches
– Global, Site, and End (GSE)
– Locator ID Separation Protocol (LISP)
13
Identifier/Locator Separation (2/2)
• Host Identity Protocol (HIP)
– Identifier: host identity based on public key
– Locator: IP address
• IETF Routing and Address Problem (RoAP)
– Name-to-identifier
– Identifier-to-locator
– Locator-forwarding
• For Ubiquitous Computing
– Geographical addressing?
14
Network-based Mobility Management
(1/2)
• For easy deployment!
– Driven by device vendors
– Proxy Mobile IPv6
15
Network-based Mobility Management
(2/2)
Mobile IPv6
Proxy Mobile
IPv6
Deployment
Difficult
Easy
Robustness/Scala
bility
No (due to route
optimization)
LMA and MAG
Handoff
Performance
Bad
Good
Packet Delivery
Performance
Good
Bad
Security
Built-in
Needed
16
Scalability (1/2)
• How to support a few billions of mobile
nodes?
• Distributed Hashing Table (DHT)
– Robust Overlay Architecture for Mobility (ROAM) by
UC Berkeley
– Distributed Home Agent for Robust Mobile Access
(DHARMA) by Upenn
– Scalable Application Mobility Protocol (SAMP) by
Seoul Nat’l Univ.
17
Scalability (2/2)
Home SIP Server
DHT-based overlay network
(e.g., Chord)
4
7
Anchor SIP Server
12
20
16
18
Overview of SAMP
Adaptability (1/2)
• How to support heterogeneous applications
and mobile nodes?
• Several Proposals
– Reconfigurable Architecture and Mobility
Management (RAMP)
– Adaptive Route Optimization (ARO)
19
Adaptability (2/2)
..
Mobility Management Module n
Network Node (NN)
Mobility Management Module 2
Mobility Management Module 1
(MMM1)
Application Layer
Mobility
Management
Controller (MMC)
Platform Registrar
(PR)
Mobility
Register
(MR)
TCP/UDP
MN information
Database (MID)
Platform Controller (PC)
IP
RAMP
Platform Controller Notifier (PCN)
Link Layer
..
Mobility Management Module-Client n
Mobile Node (MN)
Mobility Management Module-Client 2
PCN/PCN-C
Mobility Management Module-Client 1
(MMM-C1)
Mobility
Management
Controller (MMC)
Mobility
Register
(MR)
Platform Registrar-Client
(PR-C)
Physical Layer
Platform Controller-Client (PC-C)
20
Overview of RAMP
Mobility
Selector (MS)
Platform Controller Notifier-Client (PCN-C)
Mobility in Future Internet
Protocols, Applications, and
Mobility Models
21
Paradigm Shift (1/2)
• Traditional wireless mobility
– Last hop connectivity
– Soft handoff (horizontal, vertical)
– Most data and services still in the wired Internet
– Advanced ad hoc networking only in tactical and
emergency scenarios
22
Paradigm Shift (2/2)
• Emerging Wireless and Mobile Internet
– The data is collected by portable devices, and may
stay on the devices for a long time:
• Urban sensing (vehicle, people), Medical monitoring, etc
– New challenges
• Distributed index (i.e. publish/subscribe) to find the data
• Data sharing among mobile users via opportunistic P2P
networking
• Privacy, security, protection from attacks
• Intermittent operations: delay tolerant applications;
disruption tolerant networks
23
Emerging Wireless/Mobile
Protocols
24
Background (1/2)
• Changing the view on mobility
– Mobility has become an integral attribute of the
Internet and we need to design for it.
– Without mobility support, the Internet cannot be
invisible.
• There is a big gap between the opportunities
that mobility enables and the practical
protocols that can take advantage of it.
25
Background (2/2)
• Directions
– Design for mobility requires a clean-slate approach
to communication protocols in wireless networks
and the Internet
– Design for mobility has direct implications on the
Internet design, in-network storage and localization
information being key factors
– Standards are needed for benchmarks.
26
Challenges (1/2)
• The state of links is a function of mobility
– link lifetime, fading, multipath effects, etc.
• The neighborhood of a node changes with mobility
– impacts reliable exchanges and forms of
cooperation between senders and receivers (e.g.,
virtual MIMO, network coding)
• End-to-end paths change with mobility
– impacts path characteristics and the allocation of
resources over paths to satisfy application
requirements.
27
Challenges (2/2)
• Supporting security is more difficult with
mobility
– Identities of trusted nodes must change
– Privacy can be compromised with mobility (e.g.
node can be tracked by the perceived location of
its transmissions)
• Policy-based dissemination of information is
more difficult with mobility
• Feedback to control data rate is not as useful
if paths change
28
Design for Mobility: Requirements
• Some protocols benefit from mobility: group
mobility, etc.
• Controlled mobility
– Nodes move around to improve topology, deliver
data, store-carry-forward,
– Trajectory planning and changing what routes
• Interest-driven “physical” dissemination:
– How should opportunistic data mules handle data?
• Content-driven routing
29
A Clean Slate Approach (1/2)
• Exploit broadcast nature of links & in-network
storage
• OSI/TCP architecture is no longer “the best”
– MAC layer: MAC should work on broadcast and
directional transmissions; support many-to-many
rather than one-to-one communication
– Network layer: Attribute-based queries, geolocation is important, resource discovery (no DNS)
30
– Beyond routing: resource discovery replaces route
discovery; need for binding of resources/services on
the basis of names;
A Clean Slate Approach (2/2)
• OSI/TCP architecture is no longer “the best”
– Opportunistic use of resources: cooperative x-mit
schemes (take advantage of gains at PHY) and
incentive mechanisms (battery life, use of spectrum),
cooperation using memory, virtual MIMO
– Use mobility of nodes to cooperate as data mules:
need for coordination to decide which nodes move
– Peer-to-peer opportunistic transmissions: how to
cache and how to route
– Tolerance to various forms of disruption (e.g., no
connections)
31
Changing The Internet Design (1/2)
• Use of storage and location information must
be considered in the global routing design.
• Use of location information: IPv6 can be used
but we must find anonymous location
information in addressing
– Use of proxies and in-net storage
– Privacy and security implications
32
Changing The Internet Design (2/2)
• Mobility creates a stronger focus on security
– We do not know the local neighborhood!
• Opportunistic mobile routing infrastructures
will become important
• Mobility changes the expectations for services
(anywhere, anytime), but maintaining
performance with seamless mobility is difficult.
33
Case Study 1: MobiSteer (1/2)
• MobiSteer
– Using Steerable Beam Directional Antenna for
Vehicular Network Access
Omni
34
Directional
Beam
Beam steering
Case Study 1: MobiSteer (2/2)
AP
Link Quality
35
How to beam steer?
Which is the best AP?
Case Study 2: Controlled Mobility
• Mobile nodes’ mobility can be controlled,
– e.g., miniature autonomous air-vehicles
– Benefits
• Increase network throughput or reduce delays
• Maintain network connectivity
• Mobile Backbone Architecture
Mobile Backbone Node (MBN)
Regular Node (RN)
36
Case Study 3: Mobility-Assisted
Communications
• Intermittent Connectivity
– Lack of contemporaneous end-to-end paths
• Disaster communication, Vehicular ad hoc networks
• Ad-hoc/Sensor Networks, Inter-planetary networks
1
12
D
13
S
14
2
16
11
3
15
7
8
5
4
37
10
6
9
Emerging Wireless/Mobile
Applications
38
New Wireless/Mobile Applications
• Distributed
• Integrating heterogeneous infrastructure and
ad-hoc networking
• Location/Energy/User behavior-aware
• Exploit mobility
• Location privacy sensitive
• Self-configurable, self-tunable, remotely
manageable
39
Examples
• Vehicular applications
– Safety, traffic information, route planning
• Content-sharing applications
– Entertainment (video, audio), games
• Mobile external sensing
– Urban pollution sensing, accident reporting
• Mobile ad-hoc services
– Relaying to near-field users
• Emergency applications
40
Case 1: Urban Sensing in VANETs
41
Case 2: Vehicle-Assisted Data Delivery
(VADD)
• Make the best use of th
e wireless transmission
• Forward the packet via
high density area
• Use intersection as a op
portunity to switch the f
orwarding direction and
optimize the forwarding
path
42
Geographically
shortest path
Fast speed wireless c
ommunication
Case 3: Push-based Data
Dissemination
• Deliver the data to all vehicles within a given
area
• Applications
– Transportation control
– Emergency announcement
43
Case 4: Mobile Sensor Networks
• Applications
– Air quality monitoring
– Flu virus tracking
• Unique characteristics
–
–
–
–
44
Nodal mobility
Sparse connectivity
Delay/fault tolerability
Limited buffer/memory
Healthcare Application
sensor
Wildlife Tracking
Case 5: Traffic View
• Improve driving safety
– Provides driver with a real-time view of the traffic
ahead
• Prototype demonstrated in real traffic conditions
– http://discolab.rutgers.edu/traffic/tvdemo.html
45
Research Challenges (1/2)
• Mobile application design
– Location-aware, exploit mobility, gathering feedback
and traces
• Performance and QoS
– Delay tolerance, channel variations
• Cross-layer communication design
– Exploit mobile application context information
• Security issues
– Location validation, Location privacy
46
– Trust management
Research Challenges (2/2)
• Mobile data management
• Fault tolerance
– In the presence of mobility
• Remote maintainability
– Deployment, configuration, upgrade, debugging
• Application and service-oriented protocols
– Over mobile networks
47
Mobility Models and Mobile
Testbeds
48
Flexibility in Mobility Model
• Multiple scale models
– Micro and Macro levels, (e.g., from stop signs to
cross town patterns)
• Multi-faceted scenarios
– Combines motion, data traffic, map, infrastructure
– Interrelation between data/motion; data caching;
aggregation, etc
• Trade off between accuracy and usability
– Different applications may focus on different
parameters
49
Trace to Models
• Traces:
– Lack of cellular traces (owned by providers)
– Lack of vehicular traces (not enough testbeds)
– Scarcity of urban traces
• Interplay/synergy of:
– Measured traces
– Synthetic models/traces
– Theoretical motion/traffic models
50
Evaluation Methodology
• Guidelines for community
• Model validation
• Model implementation verification
• Sound statistical analysis of results
51
Flexibility in Testbeds
• Multi-layer/user vs. single-layer/user testbeds
• Heterogeneous (hardware, protocols,
applications)
• Broad range of motion patterns:
– From pre-scheduled to controlled and spontaneous
• Broad range of devices:
– From small scale testbeds (motes) to large scale
testbeds (vehicles)
52
Scalability in Testbeds
• Testbed expansion with simulation and
emulation
• Integration with real world networks and
applications
53
Measurement Methodology
• Guidelines for the community
• Validation of the model (motion, traffic, etc)
• Verification of the implementation
• Repeatability
• Sensitivity analysis
• Sound statistical analysis
54
GENI Wireless Mobility Testbeds
• Vehicular networks
• People to people networks
• Small scale - augmented by simulation (hybrid)
• Inter-operation
55
Campus Vehicular Testbed in UCLA
• Campus Vehicular Testbed (C-VeT)
– A platform to support car-to-car experiments in
various traffic conditions and mobility patterns
– A shared virtualized environment to test new
protocols and applications
– Remote access to C-VeT through web interface
– Collection of mobility traces and network statistics
– Experiments on a real vehicular network
– Full experimental Flexibility but no control on
mobility
56
V2V & V2I Testbed in OSU
• Receiver moved at x km/hr towards the
stationary transmitter
• Measured using DSRC radios:
• Received Power
• Bit Error Rate
57
Conclusion
• Mobility is a key consideration in Future
Internet!
• Need reconsideration for Internet architecture!
• Long way to go!
58
Thank you!
References (1/2)
•
NSF Workshop on Mobility in Wireless Networks
– http://netlab.cs.ucla.edu/mwnet/usemod10/wiki.cgi?Main
•
[ROAM] S. Zhuang, K. Lai, I. Stoica, R. Katz, and S. Shenker, “Host Mobility
Using an Internet Indirection Infrastructure,” ACM Wireless Networks,
11(6), November 2005.
•
[DHARMA] Y. Mao, B. Knutsson, H. Lu, and J. Smith, “DHARMA:
Distributed Home Agent for Robust Mobile Access,” in Proc. IEEE
INFOCOM 2005.
•
[SAMP] S. Pack, K. Park, T. Kwon, and Y. Choi, "SAMP: Scalable Application
Layer Mobility Protocol," IEEE Communications Magazine, 44(6), June
2006.
•
[RAMP] J. Chen, J. Yeh, S. Hung, F. Chen, L. Lin, and Y. Lan,
"Reconfigurable Architecture and Mobility Management for NextGeneration Wireless IP Networks," IEEE Trans. Wireless Communications,
6(8), August 2007.
References (2/2)
•
[ARO] S. Pack, X. Shen, J. Mark, and J. Pan, "Adaptive Route Optimization
in Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 Networks," IEEE Trans. Mobile Computing,
6(8), August 2007.
•
[MobiSteer] V. Navda, A. Subramanian, K. Dhanasekaran, A. Timm-Giel, S.
R. Das, “MobiSteer: Using Steerable Beam Directional Antenna for
Vehicular Network Access,” Proc. ACM MobiSys 2007, June 2007.
•
[VADD] http://mcn.cse.psu.edu
•
[CVeT] http://www.vehicularlab.org/
•
[IntermittentCommunication] T. Spyropoulos, K. Psounis, and C.
Raghavendra, “Performance Analysis of Mobility-Assisted Routing,” Proc.
ACM MOBIHOC, May 2006.
•
[MobileSensorNet] Y. Wang and H. Wu, “Delay/Fault-Tolerant Mobile
Sensor Network (DFT-MSN): A New Paradigm for Pervasive Information
Gathering", IEEE Trans. on Mobile Computing, 6(9), Sept. 2007.