Mobile Computing

MS.R.SHANTHI PRABHA

Assistant professor
department of computer science
sacwc.
 Motivation: the changing wireless environment

• Explosion in wireless services

– Some connectivity everywhere
– Overlapping, heterogeneous networks
• Small, portable devices
• A choice of network connectivity on one device
– Sometimes built-in
– Sometimes a portable “bridge” between choices

Spring 2002 CS444N 2

 Opportunity for connectivity

• New environment gives us opportunity

– Continuous connectivity for a mobile host
– Seamless movement between networks
• Examples
– Move from office to elsewhere in building
– Move outside building, across campus, to cafe
• Why maintain connectivity?
– Avoid restarting applications/networks
– Avoid losing “distributed state”

Spring 2002 CS444N 3

 Different approaches

• The traditional approach: support in the network

– Intelligence (and expense) is in the network
– End-points are cheap (handsets)
– Allows for supporting infrastructure
– Requires agreements/trust amongst multiple vendors
– Examples:
• A link/physical level (many wireless networks)
• At routing level (Columbia, VIP)
– Doesn’t work when switching between technologies and
often not between vendors
– In Internet would require modifying lots of routers
Spring 2002 CS444N 4
 Different approaches, continued

• The Internet approach: end-to-end

– Intelligence (and expense) is in the end-points
– Network is cheap (relatively) and as fast as possible
– Implies self-support for many activities
– Less work/trust required amongst multiple vendors
• End-to-end support at transport/naming/application
levels
– May be ideal in future, but requires extensive changes
– Not currently backwards compatible
– TRIAD may be interesting approach

Spring 2002 CS444N 5

 Different approaches, continued

• Use end-to-end support at routing level

– Makes problem transparent at layers above and below
– Current Internet standard: Mobile IP (RFC 2002)
TCP/IP network stack:
application Modify all applications?
transport Modify TCP, UDP, etc.?
routing Modify IP end-points?
link Modify all device drivers?
physical How dies this work across
network technologies?

Spring 2002 CS444N 6

 IP address problem

• Internet hosts/interfaces are identified by IP address

– Domain name service translates host name to IP address
– IP address identifies host/interface and locates its network
– Mixes naming and location
• Moving to another network requires different
network address
– But this would change the host’s identity
– How can we still reach that host?

Spring 2002 CS444N 7

 Routing for mobile hosts
MH = mobile host CH CH = correspondent host

Home network Foreign network

MH

How to direct packets to moving hosts transparently?

CH
Home network Foreign network
MH

Spring 2002 CS444N 8

 Domains versus interfaces

• Switching domains & switching interfaces are the

same problem at the routing level
Network interfaces: Administrative domains:
Stanford.edu
ether 171.64.14.X
171.64.X.X
Mobile host

Berkeley.edu
radio 42.13.0.X
128.32.X.X

Spring 2002 CS444N 9

 Mobile IP (RFC 2002)

• Leaves Internet routing fabric unchanged

• Does not assume “base stations” exist everywhere
• Simple
• Correspondent hosts don’t need to know about
mobility
• Works both for changing domains and network
interfaces

Spring 2002 CS444N 10

 Basic Mobile IP – to mobile hosts
MH = mobile host (We’ll see later that FA
CH = correspondent host is not necessary or even
HA = home agent desirable)
FA = foreign agent
CH

Home network Foreign network

HA FA MH

•MH registers new “care-of address” (FA) with HA

•HA tunnels packets to FA
•FA decapsulates packets and delivers them to MH
Spring 2002 CS444N 11
 Packet addressing
Packet from CH to MH
Source address = address of CH
Destination address = home IP address of MH
Payload

Home agent intercepts above packet and tunnels it

Source address = address of HA
Destination address = care-of address of MH
Source address = address of CH
Destination address = home IP address of MH
Original payload

Spring 2002 CS444N 12

 When mobile host moves again
CH

Home network Foreign network #1

HA FA #1 MH

Foreign network #2
FA #2 MH

•MH registers new address (FA #2) with HA & FA #1

•HA tunnels packets to FA #2, which delivers them to MH
•Packets in flight can be forwarded from FA #1 to FA #2
Spring 2002 CS444N 13
 Basic Mobile IP - from mobile hosts
Mobile hosts also send packets
CH

Home network Foreign network

HA FA MH

•Mobile host uses its home IP address as source address

-Lower latency
-Still transparent to correspondent host
-No obvious need to encapsulate packet to CH
•This is called a “triangle route”
Spring 2002 CS444N 14
 Problems with Foreign Agents

• Assumption of support from foreign networks

– A foreign agent exists in all networks you visit?
– The foreign agent is robust and up and running?
– The foreign agent is trustworthy?
• Correctness in security-conscious networks
– We’ll see that “triangle route” has problems
– MH under its own control can eliminate this problem
• Other undesirable features
– Some performance improvements are harder with FAs
• We want end-to-end solution that allows flexibility

Spring 2002 CS444N 15

 Solution
•Mobile host is responsible for itself
-(With help from infrastructure in its home network)
-Mobile host decapsulates packets
-Mobile host sends its own packets
-“Co-located” FA on MH
CH

Home network Foreign network

HA MH

MH must acquire its own IP address in foreign network

This address is its new “care-of” address
Mobile IP spec allows for this option
Spring 2002 CS444N 16
 Obtaining a foreign IP address

• Can we expect to obtain an IP address?

– DHCP becoming more common
– Dynamic IP address binding like some dial-up services
– Your friend can reserve an IP address for you
– Various other tricks
– More support for dynamic IP address binding in IPv6
• This assumes less than getting others to run a FA
• For more information about provisioning networks
for visitors, we’ll look at SPINACH later

Spring 2002 CS444N 17

 Design implications

• New issues: the mobile host now has two roles:

– Home role
– Local role

- More complex mobile host

- Loss of in-flight packets? (This can happen anyway.)
+ Can visit networks without a foreign agent
+ Can join local multicast groups, etc.
+ More control over packet routing = more flexibility

Spring 2002 CS444N 18

 Problems with ingress filtering

Home network Foreign network

CH
HA MH

•Mobile host uses its home IP address as source address

•Security-conscious boundary routers will drop this packet

Spring 2002 CS444N 19

 Solution: bi-directional tunnel
•Provide choice of “safe” route through home agent both ways

Home network Foreign network

CH
HA MH

•This is the slowest but most conservative option

At the other extreme…

Spring 2002 CS444N 20

 Problem: performance

• Example: short-lived communication

– When accessing a web server, why pay for mobility?
– Do without location-transparency
– Unlikely to move during transfer; can reload page
– Works when CH keeps no state about MH

Spring 2002 CS444N 21

 Solution: yet more flexibility
CH

Home network Foreign network

HA MH

•Use current care-of address and send packet directly

-This is regular IP!

•More generally:
-MH should have flexibility to adapt to circumstances
-A range of options: from slow-but-safe to regular IP
-Should be an end-to-end packet delivery decision (no FA)

Spring 2002 CS444N 22

 Routing options
• Allow MH to choose from among all routing options
• Options:
– Encapsulate packet or not?
– Use home address or care-of address as source address?
– Tunnel packet through home agent or send directly?
• Choice determined by:
– Performance
– Desire for transparent mobility
– Mobile-awareness of correspondent host
– Security concerns of networks traversed
• Equivalent choices for CH sending packets to MH

Spring 2002 CS444N 23

 Mobility 4x4
Outgoing Outgoing Outgoing Outgoing
Indirect, Direct, Direct, Home Direct, Temp.
Encapsulated Encapsulated Address Address
Incoming Most reliable, Requires No security-
Indirect, least efficient decapsulation conscious
Encapsulated on CH routers on path
Incoming Requires fully No security-
Direct, mobile-aware conscious
Encapsulated CH routers on path
Incoming Requires both
Direct, Home hosts to be on
Address same net. seg.
Incoming Most
Direct, Temp. efficient, no
Address mobility
Spring 2002 CS444N support 24
 Implementation
• Virtual interface (vif): illusion of MH still on home network
• We hijack the route table lookup
• Consult Mobile Policy Table in conjunction with route table
TCP UDP IPIP

MPT
IP route lookup
Routing
Table
Network Layer (IP)

loopback ether radio vif

Spring 2002 CS444N 25
 Implementation, continued
• Traffic back to home net handles boundary routers
• All web traffic uses regular IP
• Other traffic uses regular “triangle route”
• Handles multicast addresses too (bi-directional or
regular IP)

Destination Netmask Port Number Transparent Bi-directional

Mobility? tunneling?
a.b.0.0 255.255.0.0 0 Yes Yes
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 80 No N/A
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 Yes No

Spring 2002 CS444N 26

 Figuring out which to use

• With bidirectional tunneling

– Probe destination using triangle route
– If it works, switch to that option
• With triangle route
– If packets aren’t getting through after some number of
tries

Spring 2002 CS444N 27

 Is it fast enough to be seamless?
Interval Packet Packet Time in
between loss loss transition
packets (common (worst
case) case)
Cold Ether => ether 10 ms 0 1 < 10 ms
switch Ether => radio 250 ms 1 4 < 1.25 s
Radio => ether
Hot Ether => radio 250 ms 0 1 < 0.5 s
switch
Radio => ether

Spring 2002 CS444N 28

 Mobile IP issues on local network

• Host visiting local network with foreign agent

– No real presence on local network
• Host visiting local network with its own IP address
– Has a role on local network
– Reverse name lookups through special name?
– Or do you change the DNS entry?
– Its IP address / HW address gets into local hosts’ ARP
caches
– Which IP address should go into cache?
– How do you update caches if host moves again?

Spring 2002 CS444N 29

 Local ARP cache problem

• ARP caches store (IP address, HW address) pairs

• MH host visits foreign network
• Wants to talk directly back and forth to local hosts
– If it wants to maintain connectivity with them after moving
• Use home IP address
• Other hosts address MH by HW address on local link
• But if MH moves again, ARP cache entries are wrong
– If it doesn’t care
• Use local IP address
• If MH moves, ARP cache is wrong, but nobody cares

Spring 2002 CS444N 30

 Multiple Network Interfaces – Why?

• Want to probe hosts through all active interfaces

– Example: register with HA through new interface before
switching to it
– Helps with smooth handoff between types of networks
• Want transparent mobility for more than one interface
• Example:
– One application users cheap/slow interface while another
uses expensive/fast interface
– Move to new network(s) or lose contact with one network
– Don’t want to restart either application

Spring 2002 CS444N 31

 Why is this hard?

• System support missing in at least two areas

• Need “next hop” info for more than one interface
– Need to be able to send packets beyond local subnet for
more than one interface
– Current support only uses gateway info for one interface
• Mobile IP doesn’t separate traffic flows to different
interfaces
– (This isn’t the Mobile IP “simultaneous binding” feature)
– Current HA won’t keep different bindings for more than
one interface per host based on traffic flow

Spring 2002 CS444N 32

 Solution for next hop

• Backwards-compatible extension to routing table

– Add “next-hop” info for more than one interface
– Take advantage of “metric” field for priority of interface
– This maintains backwards compatible default route
Destination Gateway Netmask Flags Metric Iface
a.b.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 eth0
c.d.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 st0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 lo
0.0.0.0 a.b.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 1 eth0
0.0.0.0 c.d.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 100 st0
Spring 2002 CS444N 33
 Solution for Mobile IP

• Extend home agent

• Mobile host registers flow-to-interface bindings

flow 1 CoA1
Home Mobile
Agent Host
flow 2 CoA2
flow 1
+
flow 2
Correspondent
Host

Spring 2002 CS444N 34

 Performance overhead

• Flow binding demultiplexing cost

Flow Bindings Demultiplexing Time (s) Cost (s) Per flow (s)
0 2.1 (0.30 std. dev.) N/A N/A
1 2.3 (0.45 std. dev.) 0.2 0.20
2 2.7 (0.30 std. dev.) 0.6 0.30
10 3.9 (0.30 std. dev.) 1.8 0.18
20 4.7 (0.46 std. dev.) 2.6 0.13
30 5.3 (0.46 std. dev.) 3.2 0.11
40 6.7 (0.64 std. dev.) 4.6 0.12
60 9.2 (0.40 std. dev.) 7.1 0.12

Spring 2002 CS444N 35

 Flexible connectivity management

• Need to manage this extra flexibility through adaptivity

– Monitor availability of various interfaces
– System detects & configures interfaces automatically
– Applications can express interest in types of service
– System (or application) can choose best interface
– System feedback necessary: system notifies application of
changes as conditions warrant

Spring 2002 CS444N 36

 Connectivity management, continued

• Must address protocol interaction when connecting

– Is DHCP available?
– Is this a frequently visited network? (probe for gateways)
• If so, can use pre-determined address
– Must the host use a foreign agent here?
• If it’s broken, how do we find what’s wrong & fix it?
– Cable loose?
– Battery in radio dead?
– Home agent dead?
• Strong need for “no-futz” computing on mobile hosts

Spring 2002 CS444N 37