Advertisement

Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 29, Issue 3–4, pp 389–414 | Cite as

Mobile IPv6 Security

  • James Kempf
  • Jari Arkko
  • Pekka Nikander
Article

Abstract

Mobile IPv6 provides global mobility and location management support for the IPv6 network layer protocol. The design of Mobile IPv6 incorporates security features that differ significantly from its predecessor, Mobile IPv4. Some of the new security features are intended to counter new threats raised by route optimization, while others align Mobile IPv6 security more closely with basic IPv6 security mechanisms. In this paper, we outline the security threats to Mobile IPv6 and describe how the security features of the Mobile IPv6 protocol mitigate them.

Mobile IPv6 mobile security 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. Johnson, C. Perkins, and J. Arkko, “Mobility Support in IPv6”, Internet draft, work in progress.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. Perkins (ed.), “IP Mobility Support for IPv4”, RFC 3220, January 2002.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Kent and R. Atkinson, “Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol”, RFC 2401, November, 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Arkko, V. Devarapalli, and F. Dupont, “Using IPsec to Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling Between Mobile Nodes and Home Agents”, Internet draft, work in progress.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Conta and S. Deering, “Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification”, RFC 2473, December 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Nikander, J. Arkko, T. Aura, G. Montenegro, and E. Nordmark, “Mobile IP version 6 Route Optimization Security Design Background”, Internet draft, work in progress.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Dupont, “A Note About 3rd Party Bombing in Mobile IPv6”, Internet draft, work in progress.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Savola, “Security in IPv6 Routing Header and Home Address Options”, Internet draft, work in progress.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Kent and R. Atkinson, “IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)”, RFC 2406, November 1998.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Kent and R. Atkinson, “IP Authentication Header”, RFC 2402, November 1998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. Harkins and D. Carrel, “The Internet Key Exchange (IKE)”, RFC 2409, November 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Deering, W. Fenner and B. Haberman, “Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6”, RFC 2710, October 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. Droms (ed.) et al., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)”, RFC 3315, July 2003.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Maughan, M. Schertler, M. Schneider and J. Turner, “Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol (ISAKMP)”, RFC 2408, November 1998.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Kaufman (ed.), “Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol”, Internet Draft, work in progress.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    T. Narten, E. Nordmark and W. Simpson, “Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6)”, RFC 2461, December 1998.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Kempf and E. Nordmark, in: P. Nikander (ed.), “IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Trust Models and Threats”, RFC 3756, April 2004.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Kempf, B. Sommerfelt, B. Zill and P. Nikander, in: J. Arkko (ed.), “Secure Neighbor Discovery (SEND)”, Internet draft, work in progress.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Kempf
    • 1
  • Jari Arkko
    • 2
  • Pekka Nikander
    • 2
  1. 1.DoCoMo USA LabsSan JoseUSA
  2. 2.Ericsson ResearchJorvasFinland

Personalised recommendations