<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='http://xml.resource.org/authoring/rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY rfc5213 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5213.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc5779 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5779.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc5447 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5447.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc5844 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5844.xml">
<!ENTITY rfc6279 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6279.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-dime-rfc4005bis PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-dime-rfc4005bis.xml">
]>
<?rfc strict="yes" ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-ietf-dime-pmip6-lr-18" ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="PMIP6 Localized Routing Support">Diameter Support for Proxy
    Mobile IPv6 Localized Routing</title>

    <author fullname="Glen Zorn" initials="G" surname="Zorn">
      <organization>Network Zen</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>227/358 Thanon Sanphawut</street>

          <city>Bang Na</city>

          <region>Bangkok</region>

          <code>10260</code>

          <country>Thailand</country>
        </postal>

        <phone>+66 (0) 87-040-4617</phone>

        <email>glenzorn@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Qin Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu">
      <organization abbrev="Huawei">Huawei Technologies Co.,
      Ltd.</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District</street>

          <city>Nanjing</city>

          <region>Jiangsu</region>

          <code>21001</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <phone>+86-25-84565892</phone>

        <email>sunseawq@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Jouni Korhonen" initials="J." surname="Korhonen">
      <organization abbrev="NSN">Nokia Siemens Networks</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Linnoitustie 6</street>

          <city>Espoo FI-02600</city>

          <region></region>

          <code></code>

          <country>Finland</country>
        </postal>

        <email>jouni.nospam@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date year="2012" />

    <abstract>
      <t>In Proxy Mobile IPv6, packets received from a Mobile Node (MN) by the
      Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) to which it is attached are typically
      tunneled to a Local Mobility Anchor (LMA) for routing. The term
      "localized routing" refers to a method by which packets are routed
      directly between an MN's MAG and the MAG of its Correspondent Node (CN)
      without involving any LMA. In a Proxy Mobile IPv6 deployment, it may be
      desirable to control the establishment of localized routing sessions
      between two MAGs in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 domain by requiring that the
      session be authorized. This document specifies how to accomplish this
      using the Diameter protocol.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      <t><xref target="RFC5213">Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6)</xref> allows the
      Mobility Access Gateway (MAG) to optimize media delivery by locally
      routing packets from a Mobile Node to a Correspondent Node that is
      locally attached to an access link connected to the same Mobile Access
      Gateway, avoiding tunneling them to the Mobile Node's Local Mobility
      Anchor (LMA). This is referred to as "local routing" in RFC 5213.
      However, this mechanism is not applicable to the typical scenarios in
      which the MN and CN are connected to different MAGs and are registered
      to the same LMA or different LMAs. <xref target="RFC6279"></xref> takes
      those typical scenarios into account and defines the problem statement
      for PMIPv6 localized routing. <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr"></xref> specifies the PMIPv6 localized
      routing protocol based on the scenarios A11, A12, and A21 <xref
      target="RFC6279"></xref>, which is used to establish a localized routing
      path between two Mobile Access Gateways in a PMIPv6 domain. <vspace
      blankLines="1" />However, there is no relevant work discussing how
      AAA-based mechanisms can be used to provide authorization to the Mobile
      Node's MAG or LMA for enabling localized routing between MAGs. <vspace
      blankLines="1" /> This document describes <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis">Diameter</xref> support for the
      authorization of PMIPv6 mobility entities in case of A11,A12,A21 during
      localized routing.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Terminology">
      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
      document are to be interpreted as described in <xref
      target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Solution Overview">
      <t>This document addresses how to provide authorization to the Mobile
      Node's MAG or LMA for enabling localized routing and resolve the
      destination MN’s MAG by means of interaction between the LMA and the AAA
      server. <xref target="ref_arch"></xref> shows the reference architecture
      for Localized Routing Service Authorization. This reference architecture
      assumes that <list style="symbols">
          <t>If MN and CN belong to different LMAs, MN and CN should share the
          same MAG (i.e.,A12 described in [RFC6279]), e.g., MN1 and CN2 in
          <xref target="ref_arch"></xref> are attached to the same MAG1 and
          belong to LMA1 and LMA2 respectively. Note that LMA1 and LMA2 in
          <xref target="ref_arch"></xref> are in the same provider domain (as
          described in <xref target="RFC6279"></xref>).</t>

          <t>If MN and CN are attached to the different MAGs, MN and CN should
          belong to the same LMA (i.e.,A21 described in [RFC6279]), e.g., MN1
          and CN3 in the<xref target="ref_arch"></xref> are attached to the
          MAG1 and MAG3 respectively but belong to LMA1.</t>

          <t>MN and CN may belong to the same LMA and are attached to the same
          MAG(i.e.,A11 described in [RFC6279]), e.g.,MN1 and CN1 in the <xref
          target="ref_arch"></xref> are both attached to the MAG1 and belong
          to LMA1.</t>

          <t>The MAG and LMA support Diameter client functionality.</t>
        </list> <figure align="center" anchor="ref_arch"
          title="Localized Routing Service Authorization Reference Architecture">
          <artwork>
                                +---------+
        +----------------------&gt;|  AAA &amp;  |
        |               +------&gt;| Policy  |
        |               |       | Profile |
        |           Diameter    +---------+
        |               |
        |            +--V-+    +----+
        |   +-------&gt;|LMA1|    |LMA2|
        |   |        +---++    +----+
        |   |          | |       |
   Diameter |          | +-------+---------
        |   |          |         |        |
        |  PMIP        |         |        \\
        |   |         //        //         \\
        |   |        //        //           \\
        |   |       //        //             \\
        |   |       |         |               |
        |   +----&gt;+---------------+         +----+
        |         |     MAG1      |         |MAG3|
        +--------&gt;+---------------+         +----+
                    :    :      :              :
                 +---+  +---+  +---+         +---+
                 |MN1|  |CN1|  |CN2|         |CN3|
                 +---+  +---+  +---+         +---+
</artwork>
        </figure>The interaction of the MAG and LMA with the AAA server
      according to the extension specified in this document is used to
      authorize the localized routing service.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Attribute Value Pair Used in this Document">
      <t>This section describes Attribute Value Pairs (AVPs) defined by this
      specification or re-used from existing specifications in a
      PMIPv6-specific way.</t>

      <section title="User-Name AVP">
        <t>The User-Name AVP (AVP Code 1) is defined in <xref
        target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis"></xref>. This AVP is used to carry
        the MN-Identifier (Mobile Node identifier) <xref
        target="RFC5213"></xref> in the AA-Request (AAR) message <xref
        target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc4005bis"></xref>.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="PMIP6-IPv4-Home-Address AVP">
        <t>The PMIP6-IPv4-Home-Address AVP (AVP Code 505) is defined in <xref
        target="RFC5779"></xref>. This AVP is used to carry the IPv4-MN-HoA
        (Mobile Node's IPv4 home address)<xref target="RFC5844"></xref> in the
        AA-Request (AAR) message <xref
        target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc4005bis"></xref>.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix AVP">
        <t>The MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix AVP (AVP Code 125) is defined in <xref
        target="RFC5779"></xref>. This AVP is used to carry the MN-HNP (Mobile
        Node's home network prefix) in the AAR.</t>
      </section>

      <section anchor="flagbit" title="MIP6-Feature-Vector AVP">
        <t>The MIP6-Feature-Vector AVP is defined in <xref
        target="RFC5447"></xref>. This document allocates a new capability
        flag bit according to the IANA rules in RFC 5447.</t>

        <t>INTER_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED (TBD)<list>
            <t>Direct routing of IP packets between MNs anchored to different
            MAGs without involving any LMA is supported. This bit is used with
            MN-Identifier. When a MAG or LMA sets this bit in the MIP6-
            Feature-Vector and MN-Identifier corresponding to the Mobile Node
            is carried with this bit, it indicates to the home AAA server
            (HAAA) that the Mobile Node associated with this LMA is allowed to
            use localized routing.If this bit is cleared and MN-Identifier
            corresponding to the Mobile Node is carried with this bit, it
            indicates to the home AAA server (HAAA) that the Mobile Node
            associated with this LMA is not allowed to use localized routing.
            When a MAG or LMA sets this bit in the MIP6-Feature-Vector and MN-
            Identifiers corresponding to the Mobile Node and Correspondent
            Node are both carried with this bit, it indicates to the HAAA that
            localized routing of IP packets between Mobile Node and
            Correspondent Node anchored to different MAGs is supported. If
            this bit is cleared and MN- Identifiers corresponding to the
            Mobile Node and Correspondent Node are both carried with this bit
            to HAAA, it indicates to the HAAA that localized routing of IP
            packets between Mobile Node and Correspondent Node anchored to
            different MAGs is not supported. If this bit is cleared in the
            returned MIP6-Feature-Vector AVP, the HAAA does not authorize
            direct routing of packets between MNs anchored to the different
            MAG. The MAG and LMA MUST support this policy feature on a per-MN
            and per-subscription basis.</t>
          </list></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Example Signaling Flows for Localized Routing Service Authorization">
      <t>Localized Routing Service Authorization can happen during the network
      access authentication procedure <xref target="RFC5779"></xref> before
      localized routing is initialized. In this case, the preauthorized pairs
      of LMA/prefix sets can be downloaded to Proxy Mobile IPv6 entities
      during the RFC 5779 procedure. Localized routing can be initiated once
      the destination of a received packet matches one or more of the prefixes
      received during the RFC 5779 procedure.</t>

      <t><xref target="fig2"></xref> shows an example scenario in which MAG1
      acts as a Diameter client, processing the data packet from MN1 to MN2
      and requesting authorization of localized routing (i.e.,MAG-Initiated LR
      authorization). In this example scenario, MN1 and MN2 are attached to
      the same MAG and anchored to the different LMAs (i.e.,A12 described in
      <xref target="RFC6279"></xref>). In this case, MAG1 knows that MN2
      belongs to a different LMA (which can be determined by looking up the
      binding cache entries corresponding to MN1 and MN2 and comparing the
      addresses of LMA1 and LMA2). In order to setup a localized routing path
      with MAG2, MAG1 acts as Diameter client and sends an AAR message to the
      Diameter server. The message contains an instance of the
      MIP6-Feature-Vector (MFV) AVP (<xref target="RFC5447"></xref>, Section
      4.2.5) with the LOCAL_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED bit (<xref
      target="RFC5779"></xref>,Section 5.5 ) set,two instances of the
      User-Name AVP (<xref target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis"></xref>, Section
      8.14)containing MN1-Identifier and MN2-Identifier. In addition, the
      message may contain either an instance of the MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix AVP
      (<xref target="RFC5779"></xref>, Section 5.3) or an instance of the
      PMIP6-IPv4- Home-Address AVP (<xref target="RFC5779"></xref>, Section
      5.2) containing the IP address/ HNP of MN1. <vspace blankLines="1" />The
      Diameter server authorizes localized routing service by checking if MN1
      and MN2 are allowed to use localized routing. If so, the Diameter server
      responds with an AAA message encapsulating an instance of the
      MIP6-Feature-Vector (MFV) AVP (<xref target="RFC5447"></xref>, Section
      4.2.5) with the the LOCAL_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED bit (<xref
      target="RFC5779"></xref>,Section 5.5) set indicating direct routing of
      IP packets between MNs anchored to the same MAG is supported. MAG1 then
      knows the localized routing between MN1 and MN2 is allowed. Then MAG1
      sends the Request messages respectively to LMA1 and LMA2. The request
      message is the Localized Routing Initialization (LRI) message in Figure
      2 and belongs to the Initial phase of the localized routing. LMA1 and
      LMA2 responds to MAG1 using the Localized Routing Acknowledge message
      (LRA in<xref target="fig2"></xref> ) in accordance with <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr"></xref>. <vspace blankLines="1" />In
      case of LRA_WAIT_TIME expiration <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr"></xref>,MAG1 should ask for
      authorization of localized routing again according to the procedure
      described above before LRI is retransmitted up to a maximum of
      LRI_RETRIES.</t>

      <t><figure anchor="fig2"
          title="MAG-initiated Localized Routing Authorization in A12">
          <artwork>
   +---+   +---+    +----+    +----+     +---+   +----+
   |MN2|   |MN1|    |MAG1|    |LMA1|     |AAA|   |LMA2|
   +-|-+   +-+-+    +-+--+    +-+--+     +-+-+   +-+--+
     |       |     Anchored     |          |       |
     o---------------------------------------------o
     |       |     Anchored     |          |       |
     |       o------------------o          |       |
     |     Data[MN1-&gt;MN2]       |          |       |
     |       |-------&gt;|         |          |       |
     |       |        |  AAR(MFV, MN1,MN2) |       |
     |       |        |-------------------&gt;|       |
     |       |        |     AAA(MFV)       |       |
     |       |        |&lt;-------------------|       |
     |       |        |   LRI   |          |       |
     |       |        |--------&gt;|          |       |
     |       |        |         |   LRI    |       |
     |       |        |---------------------------&gt;|
     |       |        |   LRA   |          |       |
     |       |        |&lt;--------|          |       |
     |       |        |         |   LRA    |       |
     |       |        |&lt;---------------------------|
</artwork>
        </figure></t>

      <t><xref target="fig3"></xref> shows the second example scenario, in
      which LMA1 acts as a Diameter client, processing the data packet from
      MN2 to MN1 and requesting the authorization of localized routing. In
      this scenario, MN1 and MN2 are attached to the different MAG and
      anchored to the same LMA (i.e., A21 described in [RFC6279] ), LMA knows
      that MN1 and MN2 belong to the same LMA (which can be determined by
      looking up the binding cache entries corresponding to MN1 and MN2 and
      comparing the addresses of LMA corresponding to MN1 and LMA
      corresponding to MN2). In contrast with the signaling flow shown in
      <xref target="fig2"></xref>, it is LMA1 instead of MAG1 which initiates
      the setup of the localized routing path. <vspace blankLines="1" /> The
      Diameter client in LMA1 sends an AA-Request message to the Diameter
      server. The message contains an instance of the MIP6- Feature-Vector
      (MFV) AVP (<xref target="RFC5447"></xref>, Section 4.2.5) with the
      INTER_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED bit (Section 4.5) set indicating direct
      routing of IP packets between MNs anchored to different MAGs is
      supported and two instances of the User-Name AVP (<xref
      target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis"></xref>, Section 8.14)containing
      MN1-Identifier and MN2-Identifier. The Diameter server authorizes the
      localized routing service by checking if MN1 and MN2 are allowed to use
      localized routing. If so, the Diameter server responds with an AA-Answer
      message encapsulating an instance of the MIP6-Feature-Vector (MFV) AVP
      (<xref target="RFC5447"></xref>, Section 4.2.5) with the
      INTER_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED bit (Section 4.5) set indicating direct
      routing of IP packets between MNs anchored to different MAGs is
      supported. LMA1 then knows the localized routing is allowed. In success
      case, LMA1 responds to MAG1 in accordance with <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr"></xref>. <vspace blankLines="1" />In
      case of LRA_WAIT_TIME expiration <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr"></xref>,LMA1 should ask for
      authorization of localized routing again according to the procedure
      described above before LRI is retransmitted up to a maximum of
      LRI_RETRIES.</t>

      <t><figure align="center" anchor="fig3"
          title="LMA-initiated Localized Routing Authorization in A21">
          <artwork>
+---+    +----+  +----+     +---+    +----+   +---+
|MN1|    |MAG1|  |LMA1|     |AAA|    |MAG2|   |MN2|
+-+-+    +-+--+  +-+--+     +-+-+    +-+--+   +-+-+
  |        |       |         Anchored  |        |
  |     Anchored   o-------------------+--------o
  o--------+-------o Data[MN2-&gt;MN1]    |        |
  |        |       |&lt;-----    |        |        |
  |        |       |AAR(MFV,MN1,MN2)   |        |
  |        |       |---------&gt;|        |        |
  |        |       | AAA(MFV) |        |        |
  |        |  LRI  |&lt;---------|        |        |
  |        |&lt;------|        LRI        |        |
  |        |  LRA  |------------------&gt;|        |
  |        |------&gt;|        LRA        |        |
  |        |       |&lt;------------------|        |
</artwork>
        </figure></t>

      <t><xref target="fig4"></xref> shows another example scenario, in which
      LMA1 acts as a Diameter client, processing the data packet from MN2 to
      MN1 and requesting the authorization of localized routing. In this
      scenario, MN1 and MN2 are attached to the same MAG and anchored to the
      same LMA (i.e., A11 described in <xref target="RFC6279"></xref>), LMA
      knows that MN1 and MN2 belong to the same LMA (which can be determined
      by looking up the binding cache entries corresponding to MN1 and MN2 and
      comparing the addresses of LMA corresponding to MN1 and LMA
      corresponding to MN2).</t>

      <t>The Diameter client in LMA1 sends an AA-Request message to the
      Diameter server. The message contains an instance of the MIP6-
      Feature-Vector AVP (<xref target="RFC5447"></xref>, Section 4.2.5) with
      the LOCAL_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED bit set and two instances of the User-
      Name AVP (<xref target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis"></xref>, Section
      8.14)containing MN1- Identifier and MN2-Identifier. The Diameter server
      authorizes the localized routing service by checking if MN1 and MN2 are
      allowed to use localized routing. If so, the Diameter server responds
      with an AA- Answer message encapsulating an instance of the
      MIP6-Feature-Vector (MFV) AVP (<xref target="RFC5447"></xref>, Section
      4.2.5) with the LOCAL_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED bit (<xref
      target="RFC5779"></xref>,Section 5.5) set indicating direct routing of
      IP packets between MNs anchored to the same MAG is supported. LMA1 then
      knows the localized routing is allowed and responds to MAG1 for
      localized routing in accordance with <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr"></xref>.<vspace blankLines="1" />In
      case of LRA_WAIT_TIME expiration <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr"></xref>, LMA1 should ask for
      authorization of localized routing again according to the procedure
      described above before LRI is retransmitted up to a maximum of
      LRI_RETRIES.</t>

      <figure align="center" anchor="fig4"
              title="LMA-initiated Localized Routing Authorization in A11">
        <artwork>
+---+  +---+    +----+  +----+     +---+
|MN2|  |MN1|    |MAG1|  |LMA1|     |AAA|
+-+-+  +-+-+    +-+--+  +-+--+     +-|-+
  |      |     Anchored   |          |
  o-----------------------o          |
  |      |     Anchored   |          |
  |      o--------+-------o Data[MN2-&gt;MN1]
  |      |        |       |&lt;-----    |
  |      |        |       |AAR(MFV,MN1,MN2)
  |      |        |       |---------&gt;|
  |      |        |       | AAA(MFV) |  
  |      |        |  LRI  |&lt;---------|
  |      |        |&lt;------|          |
  |      |        |  LRA  |          |
  |      |        |------&gt;|          |
</artwork>
      </figure>
    </section>

    <section anchor="Security" title="Security Considerations">
      <t>The security considerations for the <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-dime-rfc4005bis">Diameter NASREQ</xref> and <xref
      target="RFC5779">Diameter Proxy Mobile IPv6</xref> applications are also
      applicable to this document. <vspace blankLines="1" /> The service
      authorization solicited by the MAG or the LMA relies upon the existing
      trust relationship between the MAG/LMA and the AAA server.</t>

      <t>An authorised MAG could in principle track the movement of any
      participating CNs at the level of the MAG to which they are anchored. If
      such a MAG were compromised, or under the control of a bad-actor, then
      such tracking could represent a privacy breach for the set of tracked
      CNs. In such a case, the traffic pattern from the compromised MAG might
      be notable so monitoring for e.g. excessive queries from MAGs might be
      worthwhile.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
      <t>This specification defines a new value in the Mobility Capability
      registry <xref target="RFC5447"></xref> for use with the
      MIP6-Feature-Vector AVP: INTER_MAG_ROUTING_SUPPORTED (see <xref
      target="flagbit"></xref>).</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Contributors">
      <t>Paulo Loureiro, Jinwei Xia and Yungui Wang all
      contributed to early versions of this document.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Acknowledgements">
      <t>The authors would like to thank Marco Liebsch, Carlos Jesus Bernardos
      Cano, Dan Romascanu, Elwyn Davies, Basavaraj Patil, Ralph Droms, Stephen
      Farrel,Robert Sparks, Benoit Claise and Abhay Roy for their valuable
      comments and suggestions on this document.</t>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      &rfc5779;

      &I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis;

      &rfc5213;

      &I-D.ietf-dime-rfc4005bis;

      &rfc5447;

      &rfc2119;

      &rfc5844;

      <reference anchor="I-D.ietf-netext-pmip-lr">
        <front>
          <title>Localized Routing for Proxy Mobile IPv6</title>

          <author fullname="S.Krishnan" initials="S." surname="Krishnan">
            <organization></organization>
          </author>

          <author fullname="R.Koodli" initials="R." surname="Koodli">
            <organization></organization>
          </author>

          <author fullname="P.Loureiro" initials="P." surname="Loureiro">
            <organization></organization>
          </author>

          <author fullname="Q.Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu">
            <organization></organization>
          </author>

          <author fullname="A. Dutta" initials="A." surname="Dutta">
            <organization></organization>
          </author>

          <date month="May" year="2012" />

          <abstract>
            <t>Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) is a network based mobility
            management protocol that enables IP mobility for a host without
            requiring its participation in any mobility-related signaling.
            PMIPv6 requires all communications to go through the local
            mobility anchor. As this can be suboptimal, localized routing (LR)
            allows mobile nodes attached to the same or different mobile
            access gateways to route traffic by using localized forwarding or
            a direct tunnel between the gateways. This document proposes
            initiation, utilization and termination mechanisms for localized
            routing between mobile access gateways within a proxy mobile IPv6
            domain. It defines two new signaling messages, Localized Routing
            Initiation (LRI) and Local Routing Acknowledgment (LRA), that are
            used to realize this mechanism.</t>
          </abstract>
        </front>

        <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-netext-pmip-lr-10" />

        <format target="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netext-pmip-lr-10.txt"
                type="TXT" />
      </reference>
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      &rfc6279;
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
