0
Host Identification and Location Decoupling: A Comparison of          Approaches     Bruno Magalhães Martins      Antônio M...
Outline1.   Motivation2.   Approaches for Host ID/Loc Splitting3.   Comparison4.   Conclusion                             ...
Motivation Current IP address → identification + location (overload). This limitates → mobility, multihoming, scalabilit...
Approaches for Host ID/Loc Splitting Mobile IP HIP (Host Identity Protocol) LISP (Locator ID Separation Protocol) MILS...
Mobile IP Idea:    Two IP addresses:       Home-address → static; works as an ID for app. layer;       Care-of-address...
),D0%),/-! ;2,),&#),B! %"! <#=%7,! .E! /,6%,1! ("! 2("+,! %$1!7#($%#"!3%$2#0$!7#11!%"!#"",$%6%$A-!F%+0),!G!%7701$)($,1!<#=...
3%$2! (! 2#1$! ("/!("/! %$!$2,! $2,! ),107$!(! )A5$#+)(52%! 2(12!                                      3%$2! (! 2#1$! %$! ...
LISP (Locator ID Separation Protocol) Idea:   Address mapping between edge and core IP networks; IP over    UDP over IP;...
&*,3:-@!#-!.9!313!*5!.9!1/:(:-.8!.9!CA<!6:))!&/3(20)3.!.9!(3/7.!3-&!1*0.!:.!3//*1&:-4!.*!.9!C#D!*5!.9!&2.:-3.:*-!9*2.@! A9...
MILSA     (Mobility and Multihoming Supporting Identifier Locator Split Architecture) Idea:    Separation of trust relat...
)*4:/3))+! .*! 9:,8! 69:)! 3! S*-! 30.9*1:.+! 9*)&2! .9!2@!   :-5*1,3.:*-! *5! *-! *1! ,*1! 3&&1222! *1! )*/3.*12! *5! 20/...
Akari Idea:    New namespace between network and transport layers: ID Layer. Identification:    By name and/or by iden...
Akari        Identification                   Local Name                              +IMS Domain Name                Glob...
MCP (Mobility Control Protocol) Idea:    New namespace between network and transport layers: HID-based     Communication...
,(7+*J.7G(5! 68,G! .6! +G#! F;):! EG#! .0&./+.J#! *H! 86%/J! ;)N                         %/,#.6#0! *&#G#.0! ./0! 0#$.(6! ,...
Conclusion ID/Loc splitting is one of the most important solutions to address  some of the current Internet limitations....
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Host Identification and Location Decoupling a Comparison of Approaches - IWT 2011

1,071

Published on

The increasing proliferation of mobile devices with Internet access contributed to clarify some important limitations of TCP/IP stack regarding mobility, multihoming, traceability and security. In its original design, Internet IP addresses were overloaded to simultaneously support host identification (ID) and location (Loc). As a consequence, application functionality can be affected when IP addresses are changed to update mobile nodes location. This dual functionality causes many problems in the current Internet, especially in supporting mobility. To deal with this limitations several solutions based on the idea of ID/Loc splitting have been proposed. In this position paper we present and compare some of them, summarizing their main features and limitations. We also identify opportunities and challenges for future research in the area as well as expected impacts/relations with other Future Internet aspects.

www.inatel.br/iwt

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,071
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Host Identification and Location Decoupling a Comparison of Approaches - IWT 2011"

  1. 1. Host Identification and Location Decoupling: A Comparison of Approaches Bruno Magalhães Martins Antônio Marcos Alberti © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  2. 2. Outline1. Motivation2. Approaches for Host ID/Loc Splitting3. Comparison4. Conclusion © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  3. 3. Motivation Current IP address → identification + location (overload). This limitates → mobility, multihoming, scalability, etc. Future networks need to separate identifiers (ID) from locators (Loc) → the so called ID/Loc splitting. Why ID/Loc splitting? → To move hosts without “loss of identity”. © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  4. 4. Approaches for Host ID/Loc Splitting Mobile IP HIP (Host Identity Protocol) LISP (Locator ID Separation Protocol) MILSA (Mobility and Multihoming Supporting Identifier Locator Split Architecture) Akari MCP (Mobility Control Protocol) © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  5. 5. Mobile IP Idea:  Two IP addresses:  Home-address → static; works as an ID for app. layer;  Care-of-address → dynamic; according to node’s location.  Two components:  Home-agent → atributes home-address; mantains mapping to current location;  Foreign-agent → atributes care-of-address; informs home-agent. Identification:  Home-Address Location:  Care-of-Address © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  6. 6. ),D0%),/-! ;2,),&#),B! %"! <#=%7,! .E! /,6%,1! ("! 2("+,! %$1!7#($%#"!3%$2#0$!7#11!%"!#"",$%6%$A-!F%+0),!G!%7701$)($,1!<#=%7,!.E!&0"$%#"(7%$A-!!!! Mobile IPF%+-!G-!<#=%7,!.E!&0"$%#"(7%$A-! H,15%$,!$2,!*#=%7%$A!1055#)$!#&&,),/!=A!<#=%7,!.E!(55)#(2! © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
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dentity Protocol) ,&&%%,"AB! $2,),! %1! (Host $2,!!5(4,$!/,1$%",/!$#!$2,!<>! F%+0),!T!5()$%(77A!%7701$)($,1!;SEW.E!5)#$##7!1$(4!?7,&$@!%"! F%+0),!T!5()$%(77A!%7701$)($,1!;SEW.E!5)#$##7!1$(4!?7,&$@!%"! 4,$!/,1$%",/!$#!$2,!<>! #"$)(1$! $#! $2,! ",3! Q.E! 5)#$##7! 1$(4! ?)%+2$@-! ."! $2,! 7($$,)B! #"$)(1$! $#! $2,! ",3! Q.E! 5)#$##7! 1$(4! ?)%+2$@-! ."! $2,! 7($$,)B!=,&#),! =,%"+! Idea:$2,! )#0$,/! $#! ),! =,%"+! )#0$,/! $#! $2,! $2,! $2,! 2#1$! %/,"$%&%,)! ("/!7#($#)! (),! 1,5()($,/! &)#*! ,(2! 2#1$! %/,"$%&%,)! ("/! %$1! %$1! 7#($#)! (),! 1,5()($,/! &)#*! ,(2! ,J$)(!/,7(AB!32%2!#07/!=,! (!/,7(AB!32%2!#07/!=,!,! #**0"%($%#"1-! <#=%7,! #$2,)-!;2,!.E!(//),11!3%77!#"$%"0,!$#!($!(1!(!7#($#)B!32%7,! layers:  New namespace between network and transport#**0"%($%#"1-! <#=%7,! #$2,)-!;2,!.E!(//),11!3%77!#"$%"0,!$#!($!(1!(!7#($#)B!32%7,! Host ID "+! (! )#0$%"+! #5$%*%L($%#"! $2,!Q.!%1!),15#"1%=7,!&#)!%/,"$%&A%"+!$2,!,"/!2#1$-! (! )#0$%"+! #5$%*%L($%#"!Layer $2,!Q.!%1!),15#"1%=7,!&#)!%/,"$%&A%"+!$2,!,"/!2#1$-! /%),$7A! $#! $2,! $2,! +&($%",% ! ! "/! /%),$7A! $#! +&($%",% Without HIP With HIP 7%$,)($0),! 8K:8M:8N:B! $2,! $2,! %"! 7%$,)($0),! 8K:8M:8N:B!1#76,! $2,! $2,! 5)#=7,*1! #&!7A! 1#76,! 5)#=7,*1! #&!(01,! %$! ),7%,1! #"! $2,! $2,! .E!! =,(01,! %$! ),7%,1! #"! .E!,! *(7%%#01! 01,)! ("!("! ! (! *(7%%#01! 01,)! "%(7! #&! O,)6%,! ?H#O@! H,"%(7! #&! O,)6%,! ?H#O@! ! ! ,! (//),11! "#$%&%($%#"! &(71,! (//),11! "#$%&%($%#"! F%+-!T-!S0)),"$!."$,)",$!!?7,&$@!("/!Q.E!5)#$##7!?)%+2$@!8K:-! F%+-!T-!S0)),"$!."$,)",$!!?7,&$@!("/!Q.E!5)#$##7!?)%+2$@!8K:-!  Identification: 8.! 90:1*2*9"+&3"(*0*:$;&(&35"4*1("3"+"7* 8.!90:1*2*9"+&3"(*0*:$;&(&35"4*1("3"+"7* (7!&7(31!%"!$2,!0)),"$! )%$%(7!&7(31!%"!$2,!0)),"$!"(*%! ),(//),11%"+! ("! "#$! Identifier → Public key as a flat name; provides  Host Y.OE!8Z:!%1!(!5)#5#1(7!&)#*!S%1#!OA1$,*1!3%$2!(!1%*%7()! %! ),(//),11%"+! ("! "#$! Y.OE!8Z:!%1!(!5)#5#1(7!&)#*!S%1#!OA1$,*1!3%$2!(!1%*%7()! unique IDs;("#"A*%$A! ("! "#$! =,! +#(7!$#!$2#1,!#&!Q.E!("/!<#=%7,!.E!5)#$##71B!%-,-!$#!1055#)$! +#(7!$#!$2#1,!#&!Q.E!("/!<#=%7,!.E!5)#$##71B!%-,-!$#!1055#)$!2,! ("#"A*%$A! ("! "#$! =,! &%"(77AB! $2,),! %1! "#! "#! *#=%7%$A! ("/! *07$%2#*%"+! %"! ;SEW.E! ",$3#)41-! Q#3,6,)B!! 7AP! &%"(77AB!  Location: *#=%7%$A! ("/! *07$%2#*%"+! %"! ;SEW.E! ",$3#)41-! Q#3,6,)B!! $2,),! %1! ;2,1,!/,&%%,"%,1!1$,*! Y.OE! 5)#$##7! %1! =(1,/! #"! (//),11! *(55%"+! =,$3,,"! ,/+,! Y.OE! 5)#$##7! %1! =(1,/! #"! (//),11! *(55%"+! =,$3,,"! ,/+,!,$1-!;2,1,!/,&%%,"%,1!1$,*!+!57($&#)*1!%",&&%%,"$7A! address. #),!",$3#)41! ("/!("/!$0"",7%"+! #6,)! [HE! ?[1,)! 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© Antônio M. Alberti 2011!5)#$##7!("/!%$!%1!=(1,/!#"!
  8. 8. LISP (Locator ID Separation Protocol) Idea:  Address mapping between edge and core IP networks; IP over UDP over IP; two IP addresses:  EIDs (Endpoint Identifiers) → persistent; used as an ID;  RLOCs (Routing Locators) → used to locate edge routers.  Two components:  ITR (Ingress Tunnel Router) → maps EIDs on RLOCs;  ETR (Egress Tunnel Router) → maps RLOCs on EIDs. End Host Identification/Location:  EIDs Edge Router Identification/Location:  RLOCs © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  9. 9. &*,3:-@!#-!.9!313!*5!.9!1/:(:-.8!.9!CA<!6:))!&/3(20)3.!.9!(3/7.!3-&!1*0.!:.!3//*1&:-4!.*!.9!C#D!*5!.9!&2.:-3.:*-!9*2.@! A9:2!(1*/22!/13.2!3!.0--)!B.6-!.9!&4!1*0.12@!I:401!J!:))02.13.2!.9!*(13.:*-!*5!"#$%@! LISP (Locator ID Separation Protocol) !!I:4@!J@!"#$%!50-/.:*-:-4!EFFH@! ! >*-2:&1! .9! 2/-31:*! *5! I:401! J8! 691! .9! $*01/K*&! © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  10. 10. MILSA (Mobility and Multihoming Supporting Identifier Locator Split Architecture) Idea:  Separation of trust relations, called domains, and the relations of connectivity, called zones;  Separation between signaling and data plan.  RZBS (Zone Bridging Realm Server) - provides dynamic mapping between IDs and locators. Identification:  Assigned at domain level; Location:  Assigned at zone level; © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  11. 11. )*4:/3))+! .*! 9:,8! 69:)! 3! S*-! 30.9*1:.+! 9*)&2! .9!2@! :-5*1,3.:*-! *5! *-! *1! ,*1! 3&&1222! *1! )*/3.*12! *5! 20/9! 9*2.2@!A9!<TZ$!.372!/31!*5!,3((:-4!&*,3:-2!3-&!S*-28! &+-3,:/3))+!,3((:-4!9*2.!:&-.:5:12!*-!)*/3.*12@!I:401![! MILSA (Mobility and Multihoming Supporting Identifier Locator Split Architecture) :))02.13.2!W#"$X@! !! ! m Domains Zones&!9! I:4@![@!W#"$X!/*-/(.03)!31/9:./.01!EYH@! L! ! A9! .6*! .1,:-3)2! W#"$X! 021! :&-.:5:12! :))02.13.&! :-! © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  12. 12. Akari Idea:  New namespace between network and transport layers: ID Layer. Identification:  By name and/or by identifier (ID) obtained by hash function;  Legible and unique local names;  Includes hierachical topology information in global names; Location:  IP, non-IP, post-IP. © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  13. 13. Akari Identification Local Name +IMS Domain Name Global Name Hash Function ID Locator Location Source: Akari Prpject © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  14. 14. MCP (Mobility Control Protocol) Idea:  New namespace between network and transport layers: HID-based Communication Layer. Identification:  HIDs (Host Identifiers) → hash function of host’s proprietary public key. Application/Transport Location:  Two protocols: HID-based Communication  ADP (Access Delivery Protocol);  BDP (Backbone Delivery). Network Delivery (ADP/BDP) © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
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omparison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ash function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© Antônio M. Alberti 2011,*I7.%6*/! .I*/J! 6*I#! %I7*+./+! .77*.,G#6! H*! ;"LK*,! +G#!4#6+!*/#]!
  16. 16. Conclusion ID/Loc splitting is one of the most important solutions to address some of the current Internet limitations. Legible names are important to people. Approaches need to support post-IP designs. We need to evaluate the introduction of new layers. We need more holistic and integrated designs:  To cover relationships among identifiers, names, locators and routing.  To improve security and trust.  To integrate with information ID/Loc splitting. © Antônio M. Alberti 2011
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×