IS 337: Mobile Computing

Unit 1: Mobile Network Layer - Network Protocols/Mobile

IP
Topics
• Mobile IP
• Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP)
• Mobile Ad-hoc Networks
Motivation for Mobile IP
Routing
-based on IP destination address, network prefix (e.g. 129.13.42) determines
physical subnet
-change of physical subnet implies change of IP address to have a topological
correct address (standard IP) or needs special entries in the routing tables

Specific routes to end-systems?

-change of all routing table entries to forward packets to the right destination
-does not scale with the number of mobile hosts and frequent changes in the
location, security problems

Changing the IP-address?

-adjust the host IP address depending on the current location
-almost impossible to find a mobile system, DNS updates take to long time
-TCP connections break, security problems
Requirements for Mobile IPv4 (RFC 5944 was:
3344, was: 3220, was: …, updated by:
…)
Transparency
-mobile end-systems keep their IP address
-continuation of communication after interruption of link possible
-point of connection to the fixed network can be changed

Compatibility
-support of the same layer 2 protocols as IP
-no changes to current end-systems and routers required
-mobile end-systems can communicate with fixed systems

Security
-authentication of all registration messages

Efficiency and scalability

-only little additional messages to the mobile system required (connection typically via a
low bandwidth radio link)
-world-wide support of a large number of mobile systems in the whole Internet
Terminology

Mobile Node (MN)

-system (node) that can change the point of connection to the network
without changing its IP address
Home Agent (HA)
-system in the home network of the MN, typically a router
-registers the location of the MN, tunnels IP datagrams to the COA
Foreign Agent (FA)
-system in the current foreign network of the MN, typically a router
-forwards the tunneled datagrams to the MN, typically also the default
router for the MN
Care-of Address (COA)
-address of the current tunnel end-point for the MN (at FA or MN)
-actual location of the MN from an IP point of view
-can be chosen, e.g., via DHCP
Correspondent Node (CN)
-communication partner
Example network

HA
MN

router

home network mobile end-system

Internet
(physical home network
for the MN)
F foreign
A network
router
(current physical network for
the MN)
CN

end-system router
Data transfer to the mobile system

HA
2
MN

home network 3 receiver

Internet

F foreign
network
A
1. Sender sends to the IP address of MN,
HA intercepts packet (proxy ARP)
1 2. HA tunnels packet to COA, here FA, by
CN
encapsulation
3. FA forwards the packet to the MN
sender
Data transfer from the mobile system

HA
1 MN

home network sender

Internet

F foreign
A network

1. Sender sends to the IP address

of the receiver as usual,
CN FA works as default router

receiver
Overview

COA

home router
router MN
network FA
HA

foreign
Internet
network

CN router

3.
home router router
2. MN
network HA FA
4.
foreign
Internet
network

1.
CN router
Network integration

Agent Advertisement
-HA and FA periodically send advertisement messages into their physical subnets
-MN listens to these messages and detects, if it is in the home or a foreign network
(standard case for home network)
-MN reads a COA from the FA advertisement messages

Registration (always limited lifetime!)

-MN signals COA to the HA via the FA, HA acknowledges via FA to MN
-these actions have to be secured by authentication

Advertisement
-HA advertises the IP address of the MN (as for fixed systems), i.e. standard
routing information
-routers adjust their entries, these are stable for a longer time (HA responsible for a
MN over a longer period of time)
-packets to the MN are sent to the HA,
-independent of changes in COA/FA
Agent advertisement

0 7 8 1 16 2 24 3
5 3 1
type code checksum
#addresses addr. size lifetime
router address 1
preference level 1
router. .address
. 2
type = 16 preference level 2
length = 6 + 4 * #COAs R: type = 16 length sequence number
registration required registration lifetime R B H F M G r T reserved
B: busy, no more registrations
COA 1
H: home agent
F: foreign agent COA 2
...
M: minimal encapsulation G:
GRE encapsulation
r: =0, ignored (former Van Jacobson compression)
T: FA supports reverse tunneling reserved: =0, ignored
Registration

MN FA HA MN HA

t
Mobile IP registration request
0 8 16 24

7 15 23 31
type = 1 S B DMG r T x lifetime
home address
home agent
extensions
COA . . .
identification

S: simultaneous bindings B: broadcast datagrams D:

decapsulation by MN M mininal encapsulation G:
GRE encapsulation
r: =0, ignored
T: reverse tunneling requested x: =0, ignored
Mobile IP registration reply
0 7 8 1 16 31
5
type = 3 code lifetime
home address
home agent
Example codes:
identification
registration successful
0 registration accepted extensions . . .
1registration accepted, but simultaneous mobility bindings unsupported registration
denied by FA
65administratively prohibited
66insufficient resources
67 mobile node failed authentication
68 home agent failed authentication
69 requested Lifetime too long
registration denied by HA
129 administratively prohibited
131 mobile node failed authentication
133 registration Identification mismatch
135 too many simultaneous mobility bindings
Encapsulation

original IP header original data

new IP header new data

outer header inner header original data

Encapsulation I
Encapsulation of one packet into another as payload
-e.g. IPv6 in IPv4 (6Bone), Multicast in Unicast (Mbone)
-here: e.g. IP-in-IP-encapsulation, minimal encapsulation or GRE (Generic
Record Encapsulation) IP-in-IP-encapsulation (mandatory, RFC 2003)
-tunnel between HA and COA
ver. IHL DS (TOS) length
IP identification flags fragment offset
TTL IP-in-IP IP checksum
IP address of HA
Care-of address COA
ver. IHL DS (TOS) length
IP identification flags fragment offset
TTL lay. 4 prot. IP checksum
IP address of CN
IP address of MN
TCP/UDP/ ... payload
Encapsulation II
Minimal encapsulation (optional)
-avoids repetition of identical fields
-e.g. TTL, IHL, version, DS (RFC 2474, old: TOS)
-only applicable for non fragmented packets, no space left for fragment
identification
ver. IHL DS (TOS) length
IP identification flags fragment offset
TTL min. encap. IP checksum
IP address of HA
care-of address COA
lay. 4 protoc. S reserved IP checksum
IP address of MN
original sender IP address (if S=1)
TCP/UDP/ ... payload
Generic Routing Encapsulation

original original data

header

outer header GRE original original data

header header

RFC 1701
new header new data
ver. IHL DS (TOS) length
IP identification flags fragment offset
TTL GRE IP checksum RFC 2784 (updated by
IP address of HA 2890)
Care-of address COA C reserved0 ver. protocol
C R K S s rec. rsv. ver. protocol checksum (optional) reserved1 (=0)
checksum (optional) offset (optional)
key (optional)
sequence number (optional)
routing (optional)
ver. IHL DS (TOS) length
IP identification flags fragment offset
TTL lay. 4 prot. IP checksum
IP address of CN
IP address of MN
TCP/UDP/ ... payload
Optimization of packet forwarding

Problem: Triangular Routing

-sender sends all packets via HA to MN
-higher latency and network load

“Solutions”
-sender learns the current location of MN
-direct tunneling to this location
-HA informs a sender about the location of MN
-big security problems!

Change of FA
-packets on-the-fly during the change can be lost
-new FA informs old FA to avoid packet loss, old FA now forwards remaining
packets to new FA
-this information also enables the old FA to release resources for the MN
Change of foreign agent

CN HA MN
FAold FAnew
Data Data Data
Update
ACK

Data Data
MN changes
location
Update Registration
ACK
Data
Data Data
Warning
Request
Update
ACK
Data
Data
t
Reverse tunneling (RFC 3024, was: 2344)

HA
2
MN

home network sender

1
Internet

F foreign
A network

1. MN sends to FA
3 2. FA tunnels packets to HA by
CN encapsulation
3. HA forwards the packet to the
receiver (standard case)
receiver
Mobile IP with reverse tunneling

Router accept often only “topological correct“ addresses (firewall!)

-a packet from the MN encapsulated by the FA is now topological correct
-furthermore multicast and TTL problems solved (TTL in the home network
correct, but MN is to far away from the receiver)

Reverse tunneling does not solve

-problems with firewalls, the reverse tunnel can be abused to circumvent security
mechanisms (tunnel hijacking)
-optimization of data paths, i.e. packets will be forwarded through the tunnel via the
HA to a sender (double triangular routing)

The standard is backwards compatible

-the extensions can be implemented easily and cooperate with current
implementations without these extensions
-Agent Advertisements can carry requests for reverse tunneling
Mobile IP and IPv6 (RFC 6275, was: 3775)

Mobile IP was developed for IPv4, but IPv6 simplifies the protocols
-security is integrated and not an add-on, authentication of registration is included
-COA can be assigned via auto-configuration (DHCPv6 is one candidate), every
node has address auto- configuration
-no need for a separate FA, all routers perform router advertisement which can be
used instead of the special agent advertisement; addresses are always co-located
-MN can signal a sender directly the COA, sending via HA not needed in this case
(automatic path optimization)
-„soft“ hand-over, i.e. without packet loss, between two subnets is supported
- MN sends the new COA to its old router
- the old router encapsulates all incoming packets for the MN and forwards them
to the new COA
- authentication is always granted
Problems with mobile IP

Security
-authentication with FA problematic, for the FA typically belongs to another
organization
-no common protocol for key management and key distribution widely
accepted in the Internet

Firewalls
-typically mobile IP cannot be used together with firewalls, special set-ups
are needed (such as reverse tunneling)

QoS
-many new reservations in case of RSVP
-tunneling makes it hard to give a flow of packets a special treatment needed
for the QoS

Security, firewalls, QoS etc. are topics of research and discussions

Security in Mobile IP
Security requirements (Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol, RFC 4301, was: 1825, 2401)
-Integrity
any changes to data between sender and receiver can be detected by the receiver
-Authentication
sender address is really the address of the sender and all data received is really data sent by this
sender
-Confidentiality
only sender and receiver can read the data
-Non-Repudiation
sender cannot deny sending of data
-Traffic Analysis
creation of traffic and user profiles should not be possible
-Replay Protection
receivers can detect replay of messages
IP security architecture I
Two or more partners have to negotiate security mechanisms to setup a security association
-typically, all partners choose the same parameters and mechanisms Two headers have been
defined for securing IP packets:
-Authentication-Header
- guarantees integrity and authenticity of IP packets
- if asymmetric encryption schemes are used, non-repudiation can also be guaranteed

-Encapsulation Security Payload

- protects confidentiality between communication partners

IP header
IP- authentication header
Authentification- UDP/TCP data
UDP/TCP-
Header Header Paket

not encrypted encrypted

IP header ESP header encrypted data
IP security architecture II
Mobile Security Association for registrations
-parameters for the mobile host (MH), home agent (HA), and foreign agent (FA) Extensions of the IP security
architecture
-extended authentication of registration

MH-FA authentication FA-HA authentication MH-HA authentication

registration request
registration request
MH FA registration reply HA
registration reply

- prevention of replays of registrations

- time stamps: 32 bit time stamps + 32 bit random number
- nonces: 32 bit random number (MH) + 32 bit random number (HA)
Key distribution

Home agent distributes session keys

FA MH

response:
EHA-FA {session key}
EHA-MH {session key}
HA

foreign agent has a security association with the home agent mobile host registers
a new binding at the home agent
home agent answers with a new session key for foreign agent and mobile node
IP Micro-mobility support
Micro-mobility support:
-Efficient local handover inside a foreign domain
without involving a home agent
-Reduces control traffic on backbone
-Especially needed in case of route optimization

Example approaches (research, not products):

-Cellular IP
-HAWAII
-Hierarchical Mobile IP (HMIP)

Important criteria:
Security Efficiency, Scalability, Transparency,
Manageability
Cellular IP

Internet
Operation:
-“CIP Nodes” maintain routing entries (soft state) for Mobile IP
MNs
-Multiple entries possible CIP Gateway
data/control
-Routing entries updated based on packets sent by MN packets
CIP Gateway: from MN 1
-Mobile IP tunnel endpoint
-Initial registration processing
Security provisions: BS BS BS
packets from
-all CIP Nodes share “network key” MN2 to MN 1
-MN key: MD5(net key, IP addr)
MN1 MN2
-MN gets key upon registration
Cellular IP: Security

Advantages:
-Initial registration involves authentication of
MNs and is processed centrally by CIP
Gateway
-All control messages by MNs are authenticated
-Replay-protection (using timestamps)

Potential problems:
-MNs can directly influence routing entries
-Network key known to many entities
(increases risk of compromise)
-No re-keying mechanisms for network key
-No choice of algorithm (always MD5,
prefix+suffix mode)
-Proprietary mechanisms (not, e.g., IPSec AH)
Cellular IP: Other issues
Advantages:
-Simple and elegant architecture
-Mostly self-configuring (little management needed)
-Integration with firewalls / private address support possible

Potential problems:
-Not transparent to MNs (additional control messages)
-Public-key encryption of MN keys may be a problem for
resource-constrained MNs
-Multiple-path forwarding may cause inefficient use of
available bandwidth
HAWAII

Internet
Operation: HA
1. MN obtains co-located COA
Backbone
2. and registers with HA
Router
3. Handover: MN keeps COA, new
BS answers Reg. Request and
Crossover
updates routers
Router
4. MN views BS as foreign agent
2
4 Mobile IP
Security provisions:
-MN-FA authentication mandatory BS BS DHCP
BS Server
-Challenge/Response Extensions mandatory
Mobile IP
3 MN DHCP
1
MN
HAWAII: Security

Advantages:
-Mutual authentication and C/R extensions mandatory
-Only infrastructure components can influence routing entries

Potential problems:
-Co-located COA raises DHCP security issues (DHCP has no
strong authentication)
-Decentralized security-critical functionality
(Mobile IP registration processing during handover) in base
stations
-Authentication of HAWAII protocol messages unspecified
(potential attackers: stationary nodes in foreign network)
-MN authentication requires PKI or AAA infrastructure
HAWAII: Other issues
Advantages:
-Mostly transparent to MNs
(MN sends/receives standard Mobile IP messages)
-Explicit support for dynamically assigned home
addresses

Potential problems:
-Mixture of co-located COA and FA concepts may not
be supported by some MN implementations
-No private address support possible because of co-
located COA
 Hierarchical Mobile IPv6 (RFC 5380, was: 4140)
Operation:
-Network contains mobility anchor point (MAP)
- mapping of regional COA (RCOA) to link COA (LCOA) Internet
-Upon handover, MN informs MAP only HA
- gets new LCOA, keeps RCOA
-HA is only contacted if MAP changes
RCOA
MAP

binding AR AR
Security provisions:
-no HMIP-specific security update LCOAold
LCOAnew
provisions
-binding updates should be MN MN
authenticated
Hierarchical Mobile IP: Security
Advantages:
-Local COAs can be hidden,
which provides at least some location privacy
-Direct routing between CNs sharing the same link is possible (but might be dangerous)

Potential problems:
-Decentralized security-critical functionality (handover processing) in mobility anchor points
-MNs can (must!) directly influence routing entries via binding updates (authentication necessary)
Hierarchical Mobile IP: Other issues
• Advantages:
- Handover requires minimum number of overall changes to routing
tables
- Integration with firewalls / private address support possible

• Potential problems:
- Not transparent to MNs
- Handover efficiency in wireless mobile scenarios:
- Complex MN operations
- All routing reconfiguration messages sent over wireless link
Start here
 DHCP: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol

Application
-simplification of installation and maintenance of networked computers
-supplies systems with all necessary information, such as IP address, DNS server address, domain name, subnet
mask, default router etc.
-enables automatic integration of systems into an Intranet or the Internet, can be used to acquire a COA for
Mobile IP
Client/Server-Model
-the client sends via a MAC broadcast a request to the DHCP server (might be via a DHCP relay)

DHCPDISCOVER

DHCPDISCOVER
server client

client relay
DHCP - protocol mechanisms
server client server
(not selected) initialization (selected)
DHCPDISCOVER
determine the DHCPDISCOVER determine the
configuration configuration
DHCPOFFER
DHCPOFFER
collection of replies

selection of configuration
DHCPREQUEST DHCPREQUEST
(reject) (options) confirmation of
configuration
DHCPAC
K
initializatio
n
completed
DHCPRELEASE delete context

release
DHCP characteristics

Server
-several servers can be configured for DHCP, coordination not yet standardized (i.e.,
manual configuration) Renewal of configurations
-IP addresses have to be requested periodically, simplified protocol Options
-available for routers, subnet mask, NTP (network time protocol) timeserver, SLP
(service location protocol) directory, DNS (domain name system)
Host Identity Protocol v2 (HIPv2, RFC 7401,
was: 5201, updated by 6253)
Separation of Identification and Localization of mobile device (“Locator/ID split”)
-Alternative to Mobile IP
-Introduction of HIP layer between routing and transport
-IP addresses for routing only, change depending on location (must be topological correct!)
-Identification via Host Identity Tag, used e.g. for TCP connection identification instead of IP address
-Host Identity Tag based on public keys
- Communication requires Diffie Hellman key exchange
-Pro
- No intermediate agent, normal IP routing
-Con
- Extra RTT due to key exchange, firewalls, extra layer
- See also RFCs 5202, 5203, 5204, 5205, 5206, 5207, 5770…

Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP, RFC 6830)

-New routing concept, tunneling for data transport, no changes to hosts
-RLOC (Routing Locator) and EID (Endpoint Identifier)
Mobile ad hoc networks
Standard Mobile IP needs an infrastructure
-Home Agent/Foreign Agent in the fixed network
-DNS, routing etc. are not designed for mobility Sometimes
there is no infrastructure!
-remote areas, ad-hoc meetings, disaster areas
-cost can also be an argument against an infrastructure!
Main topic: routing
-no default router available
-every node should be able to forward

A B C
Solution: Wireless ad-hoc networks

Network without infrastructure

-Use components of participants for networking

Examples
-Single-hop: All partners max. one hop apart
- Bluetooth piconet, PDAs in a room, gaming
devices…

- Multi-hop: Cover larger distances, circumvent

obstacles
- Bluetooth scatternet, TETRA police network, car-
to-car networks…

Internet: MANET (Mobile Ad-hoc Networking)

group
Manet: Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

Mobile

Router
Manet

Mobile
Devices

Mobile IP,
DHCP

Fixed
Network

Router End system

Problem No. 1: Routing
Highly dynamic network topology
-Device mobility plus varying channel quality
-Separation and merging of networks possible
-Asymmetric connections possible
N7 N6
N6
N7
N1 N1
N2 N3
N3 N2

N4 N4
N5 N5

time = t1 time = t2

good link
weak
link
Traditional routing algorithms
Distance Vector
-periodic exchange of messages with all physical neighbors that contain information about who can be reached at
what distance
-selection of the shortest path if several paths available

Link State
-periodic notification of all routers about the current state of all physical links
-router get a complete picture of the network

Example
-ARPA packet radio network (1973), DV-Routing
-every 7.5s exchange of routing tables including link quality
-updating of tables also by reception of packets
-routing problems solved with limited flooding
Routing in ad-hoc networks

THE big topic in many research projects

-Far more than 50, 100, 150, … different proposals exist
-The most simple one: Flooding!

Reasons
-Classical approaches from fixed networks fail
- Very slow convergence, large overhead
-High dynamicity, low bandwidth, low computing power

Metrics for routing

-Minimal
- Number of nodes, loss rate, delay, congestion, interference …
-Maximal
- Stability of the logical network, battery run-time, time of connectivity …
Problems of traditional routing algorithms
Dynamic of the topology
-frequent changes of connections, connection quality, participants

Limited performance of mobile systems

-periodic updates of routing tables need energy without contributing to the
transmission of user data, sleep modes difficult to realize
-limited bandwidth of the system is reduced even more due to the exchange of
routing information
-links can be asymmetric, i.e., they can have a direction dependent transmission
quality
DSDV (Destination Sequenced Distance Vector,
historical)
Early work
-on demand version: AODV

Expansion of distance vector routing Sequence numbers for

all routing updates

-assures in-order execution of all updates
-avoids loops and inconsistencies

Decrease of update frequency

-store time between first and best announcement of a path
-inhibit update if it seems to be unstable (based on the stored
time values)
Dynamic source routing I

Split routing into discovering a path and maintaining a path

Discover a path
-only if a path for sending packets to a certain destination is needed and no
path is currently available

Maintaining a path
-only while the path is in use one has to make sure that it can be used
continuously

No periodic updates needed!

Dynamic source routing II

Path discovery
-broadcast a packet with destination address and unique ID
-if a station receives a broadcast packet
- if the station is the receiver (i.e., has the correct destination address) then return the
packet to the sender (path was collected in the packet)
- if the packet has already been received earlier (identified via ID) then discard the
packet
- otherwise, append own address and broadcast packet
-sender receives packet with the current path (address list)

Optimizations
-limit broadcasting if maximum diameter of the network is known
-caching of address lists (i.e. paths) with help of passing packets
- stations can use the cached information for path discovery (own paths or paths for
other hosts)
DSR: Route Discovery
Sending from C to O

P R

C
G Q

B I
E
K M O
A
H

D L
F J N
DSR: Route Discovery
Broadcast

P R
[O,C,4711
]
[O,C,4711 C G Q
]
B I
E
K M O
A
H

D L
F J N
DSR: Route Discovery
P R
[O,C/
C G,4711]
G [O,C/ Q
[O,C/
G,4711]
B,4711]
B I
E
K M O
A
[O,C/ H
E,4711]
D L
F J N
DSR: Route Discovery

P R

C
G Q

[O,C/G/I,4711]
B I
E
K M O
A
H
[O,C/E/H,4711]
[O,C/B/A,4711] D L
F J N
[O,C/B/D,4711]
(alternatively:
[O,C/E/D,4711])
DSR: Route Discovery

P R

C
G Q

[O,C/G/I/K,4711]
B I
E
K M O
A
H

D L
F J N
[O,C/E/H/J,4711]
[O,C/B/D/F,4711]
DSR: Route Discovery

P R

C
G Q

[O,C/G/I/K/M,4711]
B I
E
K M O
A
H

D L
F J N

[O,C/E/H/J/L,4711]
(alternatively:
[O,C/G/I/K/L,4711])
DSR: Route Discovery
P R

C
G Q

B I
E
K M O
A
H

D L
F J N

[O,C/E/H/J/L/N,4711]
DSR: Route Discovery
P R

C
G Q

Path: M, K, I, G
B I
E
K M O
A
H

D L
F J N
Dynamic Source Routing III
Maintaining paths
-after sending a packet
- wait for a layer 2 acknowledgement (if applicable)
- listen into the medium to detect if other stations forward the packet (if
possible)
- request an explicit acknowledgement
-if a station encounters problems it can inform the sender of a packet or look-up a
new path locally
Interference-based routing

Routing based on assumptions about interference between signals

N1
N2

R1
S1 N3

N4

N5 N6 R2
S2

N8 N9
N7
neighbors
(i.e. within radio range)
Examples for interference based routing
Least Interference Routing (LIR)
-calculate the cost of a path based on the number of stations that can receive a transmission Max-
Min Residual Capacity Routing (MMRCR)
-calculate the cost of a path based on a probability function of successful transmissions and
interference Least Resistance Routing (LRR)
-calculate the cost of a path based on interference, jamming and other transmissions

LIR is very simple to implement, only information from direct neighbors is necessary
A plethora of ad hoc routing protocols

Flat
-proactive
- FSLS – Fuzzy Sighted Link State
- FSR – Fisheye State Routing
- OLSR – Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (RFC 3626)
- TBRPF – Topology Broadcast Based on Reverse Path
Forwarding
-reactive
- AODV – Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (RFC 3561) Two promising
- DSR – Dynamic Source Routing (RFC 4728) candidates:
- DYMO – Dynamic MANET On-demand OLSRv2 and
Hierarchical DYMO
-CGSR – Clusterhead-Gateway Switch Routing
-HSR – Hierarchical State Routing
-LANMAR – Landmark Ad Hoc Routing
-ZRP – Zone Routing Protocol
Geographic position assisted
-DREAM – Distance Routing Effect Algorithm for Mobility
-GeoCast – Geographic Addressing and Routing
-GPSR – Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing
-LAR – Location-Aided Routing
Further difficulties and research areas

Auto-Configuration
-Assignment of addresses, function, profile, program, …
Service discovery
-Discovery of services and service providers
Multicast
-Transmission to a selected group of receivers
Quality-of-Service
-Maintenance of a certain transmission quality
Power control
-Minimizing interference, energy conservation
mechanisms
Security
-Data integrity, protection from attacks (e.g. Denial of
Service)
Scalability
-10 nodes? 100 nodes? 1000 nodes? 10000 nodes?
Integration with fixed networks
Clustering of ad-hoc networks

Internet
Cluster head
Base station

Cluster

Super cluster
 The next step: Wireless Sensor Networks
(WSN)
Commonalities with MANETs
-Self-organization, multi-hop
-Typically wireless, should be energy efficient

Differences to MANETs
-Applications: MANET more powerful, more general  WSN more
specific
-Devices: MANET more powerful, higher data rates, more resources
 WSN rather limited, embedded, interacting with environment
-Scale: MANET rather small (some dozen devices)
 WSN can be large (thousands)
-Basic paradigms: MANET individual node important, ID centric
 WSN network important, individual node may be dispensable, data
centric
-Mobility patterns, Quality-of Service, Energy, Cost per node …
Properties of wireless sensor networks

Sensor nodes (SN) monitor and control the environment Nodes process data and forward data
via radio
Integration into the environment, typically attached to other networks over a gateway (GW)
Network is self-organizing and energy efficient
Potentially high number of nodes at very low cost per node
GW Bluetooth, TETRA, …
SN
SN

SN SN
SN SN
GW
SN
SN
SN
SN
GW
SN
GW SN
Promising applications for WSNs

Machine and vehicle monitoring

-Sensor nodes in moveable parts
-Monitoring of hub temperatures, fluid levels …

Health & medicine

-Long-term monitoring of patients with minimal restrictions
-Intensive care with relative great freedom of movement

Intelligent buildings, building monitoring

-Intrusion detection, mechanical stress detection
-Precision HVAC with individual climate

Environmental monitoring, person tracking

-Monitoring of wildlife and national parks
-Cheap and (almost) invisible person monitoring
-Monitoring waste dumps, demilitarized zones

… and many more: logistics (total asset management, RFID), telematics …

-WSNs are quite often complimentary to fixed networks!
 Robust HW needed - example: Modular Sensor
Board

Modular design
-Core module with controller, transceiver, SD-card slot
-Charging/programming/GPS/GPRS module
-Sensor carrier module

Software
-Firmware (C interface)
-RIOT, TinyOS, Contiki …
-Routing, management, flashing …
-ns-2 simulation models
-Integration into Visual Studio, Eclipse, LabVIEW, Robotics Studio …

Sensors attached on demand

-Acceleration, humidity, temperature, luminosity, noise detection, vibration, PIR movement
detection…
Example: Evolution of different sensor nodes

Certified nodes
-Fully certified according to international regulations
-Range > 1.5 km (LOS), > 500m in buildings
-< 100µA while still running (no sensors, no RF)
-Can drive external sensors up to 500mA
(analog/digital)
-SPI, serial, I²C, display, camera, joystick interfaces

Gateways
-Bluetooth, WLAN, Ethernet, serial, USB, RS485,
GSM/GPRS

Software
-Auto-configuration, GPS tracking,
over-the-air programming, building monitoring, …

Evaluation boards
Example Application: Habitat
Monitoring/Skomer Island UK

Manx
Shearwater
Combination of RFID and ScatterWeb
Main challenge: robustness, reliability, easy-to-use
Joint project with Oxford University and MSRC
Project FeuerWhere – the extreme challenge
Mobile, self-organizing WSN
TETRA trunked radio
network
TETRA

Berliner Feuerwehr 4450 fire Data transmission

fighters & localization
300000 incidents/year (8000 fires)
Mobile Ad-hoc Networks

• Jochen Schiller – Mobile Communications

• Chapter 8 page 330 - 344
IPv6

• The design of Mobile IP support in IPv6 (Mobile IPv6) benefits both

from the experiences gained from the development of Mobile IP
support in IPv4, and from the opportunities provided by IPv6.
• Mobile IPv6 thus shares many features with Mobile IPv4, but is
integrated into IPv6 and offers many other improvements.
• Major differences between Mobile IPv4 and Mobile IPv6
IPv6
• Major differences between Mobile IPv4 and Mobile IPv6
• There is no need to deploy special routers as "foreign agents", as in Mobile IPv4. Mobile IPv6 operates
in any location without any special support required from the local router
• Support for route optimization is a fundamental part of the protocol, rather than a nonstandard set of
extensions
• Mobile IPv6 route optimization can operate securely even without pre-arranged security associations. It
is expected that route optimization can be deployed on a global scale between all mobile nodes and
correspondent nodes.
• Support is also integrated into Mobile IPv6 for allowing route optimization to coexist efficiently with
routers that perform "ingressfiltering“
• The IPv6 Neighbor Unreachability Detection assures symmetric reachability between the mobile node
and its default router in the current location
• Most packets sent to a mobile node while away from home in Mobile IPv6 are sent using an IPv6 routing
header rather than IP encapsulation, reducing the amount of resulting overhead compared to Mobile IPv4
• Mobile IPv6 is decoupled from any particular link layer, as it uses IPv6 NeighborDiscovery instead of
ARP. This also improves the robustness of the protocol
• The use of IPv6 encapsulation (and the routing header) removes the need in Mobile IPv6 to manage
"tunnel soft state".
• The dynamic home agent address discovery mechanism in Mobile IPv6 returns a single reply to the
mobile node. The directed broadcast approach used in IPv4 returns separate replies from each home
agent
Reading and Review Questions

• Jochen Schiller – Mobile Communications

• Chapter 8