Subject: [nemo] IPv4 prefix option for NEMO BS

From: Keiichi SHIMA <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 14:00:56 +0900 (JST)

Hello,

I have submitted an Internet-Draft which specifies the mechanism to
enable IPv4 mobile network using IPv6 infrastructure.  Unfortunately,
the draft will not appear in the I-D directory, since I couldn't
submit it before the deadline.  If you are interested in the
idea, you can get a copy of the draft from the following URL.

http://www.kame.net/~keiichi/internet-drafts/draft-shima-nemo-v4prefix-00.txt

I quote the Introduction section so that you can overview the intent
of the draft bellow.  Any comments are welcome.

Regards,

----
1.  Introduction

   NEMO (RFC3963) [1] specifies the mechanism to provide mobility
   functions to IPv6 networks.  All IPv6 networks behind a NEMO capable
   router can move around all over the Internet with the NEMO router,
   without breaking existing connections between nodes inside the moving
   network and nodes of the Internet.

   The NEMO specification mentions only IPv6 networks.  In this
   document, we propose an extension which adds the IPv4 network support
   to the NEMO specification.  With the option we introduce in this
   document, we can operate IPv4 mobile networks over the IPv6 network
   infrastructure.

   Considering the situation that we need to live with both IPv4 and
   IPv6 networks during the transition period before we have completely
   shifted to IPv6, many IPv4 devices/networks will be used for a long
   time.  NEMO provides a simple mechanism to enable IPv6 networks move
   around the Internet.  The technology is expected to be used for
   various scenes, such as implementing car/train networks, a personal
   area networks, or even providing redundancy to networks of an entire
   site of an
   organization(draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network [2]).
   Supporting only IPv6 devices and dropping IPv4 devices are not good
   idea especially in the forthcoming long transition period.

   However defining a new mobile network protocol for IPv4 is not
   expected, since IPv4 is going to disappear finally.  This document
   defines a mechanism to provide IPv4 mobile network using IPv6
   connections.  We can use with both protocols with this proposed
   technology and we also can move to IPv6 only network seamlessly when
   the IPv4 network completes its role.

---
Keiichi SHIMA
IIJ Research Laboratory <[email-masked]>
KAME Project <[email-masked]>

---

From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:22:38 -0700

hi Keiichi,

thanks for writing up a draft on this.

I think something like this is needed and I support working
on this in the NEMO WG.

this scenario had in fact come up in the mip6trans (v4
traversal) design team. we concluded that this does not
directly impact the v4 traversal solution and can be done
separately.

Vijay

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:11:32 +0200

Keiichi, thanks for writing this draft, it is an interesting approach in
a v4-v6 coexistence mobility model.

It takes a particular perspective at seeing IP deployment, where a
wide-area network is completely IPv6 enabled and has no IPv4, so IPv4
traffic needs to be tunneled through IPv6.

What is the tunneling method planned for putting application-level IPv4
packets in IPv6 packets?

Thank you,

Alex

---

From: Keiichi SHIMA <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:03:03 +0900 (JST)

Hi Vijay,

From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:22:38 -0700

> directly impact the v4 traversal solution and can be done

Yes, I also think it can be done separately.  I think the goals of the
v4 traversal and my draft are different.  The former tries to invent a
method to enable IPv6 mobility over the IPv4 infrastructure, and the
latter tries to enable IPv4 mobility over the IPv6 infrastructure.

These two mechanisms are both required during the transition period.
And, if we carefully design them, we can use both technology even at
the same time, which makes IPv4 NEMO over the IPv4 infrastructure with
NEMO signaling messages.

I hope many people support the idea.

Regards,
---
Keiichi SHIMA

---

From: Keiichi SHIMA <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:14:48 +0900 (JST)

Hi Alex,

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:11:32 +0200

> a v4-v6 coexistence mobility model.

Yes, moreover, we definitely need IPv4 at least during the transition
period, I think.  Many people request IPv4 connectivity in fact, even
if they know NEMO and they are interested in IPv6 mobility
technologies.
 
> traffic needs to be tunneled through IPv6.

Yes, and such a situation has been already occurred partially.  Some
ISP already can provide IPv6 connectivity to all customers of its
service area, at least with fixed lines.  When the idea raised in my
head, I was thinking to provide multihoming service to the ISP
customers using draft-nagami-mip6-nemo-multihome-fixed-network.  In
the current situation, all customer needs IPv4 also.  If NEMO can
also provide IPv4 network mobility capability, maybe I can provide
NEMO based multihoming service right now.
 
> What is the tunneling method planned for putting application-level IPv4

I'm sorry but I'm afraid I didn't get your question...  I was just
thinking that all IPv4 packets are tunneled through the IPv6 tunnel
between a mobile router and its home agent.  What do you mean by
'application-level'?

Regards,
---
Keiichi SHIMA

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:44:06 +0200

> between a mobile router and its home agent.  What do you mean by

Sorry, that is right, I was missing the fact that RFC2473 "Generic
Packet Tunnelling IPv6" can actually encapsulate IPv4 in IPv6 too, not
only IPv6 in IPv6.

Alex