Wireless LANs whole point is is  the convenience of the mobility you get being able to wander from one  part of the office to the other. Users expect the same completely  transparent service they get as their mobile phones move from one cell  to another, but in the world of 802.11 it’s not actually that easy.  There’s a lot of publicity about roaming in Wi-Fi just now, for instance  a new IEEE group on testing Wi-Fi has found that it is impossible to  compare roaming times without a definition of roaming. While many  wireless switch vendors make a point of roaming at Layer 3 (a technology  we’ll cover the technicalities of in a later article), several other  vendors (such as Bluesocket and Vernier, reviewed here under its HP  badge) solve the problem by keeping all access points on a single  subnet, so the roaming only happens at Layer 2 and the roaming device  keeps the same IP address. What most people miss is that even roaming  within a subnet, at Layer 2, has its challenges. What’s involved?
When  a WLAN client moves from the range of one Access Point (AP) to another  in the same subnet, it needs to find the best AP, decide when to roam  onto it, associate with it and do any authentication required, as per  your security policies. Then the wired network has to relearn the  location of the client, so that data can be sent to it. All of this  takes time and this is without the client having to worry about getting a  new IP address! The scanning and decision making part of the roaming  process (see How to Make your WLAN roam faster) allows the client to  find a new AP on an appropriate channel as the user moves. When this  happens, the client must associate with the new AP. It must then,  assuming that it is an 802.1x supplicant (see The EAP Heap),  reauthenticate with the RADIUS server. This is transparent to the user -  but the delay in this happening may not be. It can take up to a second  for association and authentication to occur (see below for implications  and solutions). IAPP
The next part of the process is for the rest of  the network to be made aware that the client has shifted. This calls for  AP to AP communication, which was never catered for in the original  802.11 spec. Vendors had their own way of passing updates; however  802.11f, the Inter-Access Point Protocol, has now been now published by  the IEEE as a trial-use standard - it sits in this state for two years  before being submitted as a full-use standard - to facilitate  multi-vendor AP interoperability. IAPP calls for the new servicing AP to  send out two packets onto the wired LAN. One of these is actually set  with the source address of the client (the standard says this should be a  broadcast, however some implementations still use unicast to the  previous AP or a multicast) and is used by intervening switches to  update their MAC address tables with the client’s new location. The  other is an IAPP ADD-notify packet from the new AP to an IAPP multicast  address that all APs subscribe to, which contains the MAC address of the  station it has just associated. All APs will receive this packet, and  the one that had been associated with that station will use the sequence  number included to determine that this is newer information and remove  the stale association from its internal table. IAPP provides for the  sharing of information between APs. The format of this information is  specified, as "contexts" but the actual content is not defined, so it’s  not yet hugely useful as far as vendor interoperability is concerned.  Also IAPP has no specific provision for security. Who Cares?
So,  worst case, you’re probably looking at about one second where your  client can’t be reached over the network. For a lot of clients and  applications, this isn’t an issue. If you’re walking from one room to  another carrying your laptop, and you want to use email or a web  browser, it’s not a problem. In fact, most TCP-based applications will  be able to handle this sort of hiccup (remember that in this instance  there’s no address change). UDP applications are less able to handle  interruptions, and unfortunately, these are the ones where a break would  be most noticed by the user. The killer? Voice. Not only is VoWLAN  UDP-based for the bearer traffic, but it’s also the one application  where you are likely to be using it as you move between APs. And you are  definitely going to notice a one second hit. Which is presumably why  the vendors that are pushing fast roaming for 802.11 are the ones  squarely behind the use of wireless handsets in an IP Telephony  environment, such as Cisco, SpectraLink and Symbol. Related standards
In  fact these are three of the companies behind the drive for a new IEEE  Working Group to create a standard to handle faster Layer 2 roaming.  There are several related standards and works-in-progress, but none that  actually cover this specific aspect:
* As already discussed, IAPP—802.11f—isn’t designed for speed.
* 802.11i, the security standard (not yet ratified) has provision  for secure fast handoff, but it’s too security specific for this  requirement.
* 802.11k—Radio Resource Management—might help in  that it should cater for faster discovery of APs. Again, not yet  finalised.
* 802.21 isn’t specifically for wireless LANs at all.  It’s aimed at the handoff between heterogeneous networks (wired, 802.11,  Bluetooth) and while it will deal with inter-ESS roaming (ie subnet to  subnet in a WLAN), it won’t speed up the Layer 2 process which is needed  prior to any Layer 3 interaction. This was the P802 Handoff Study  Group, and is just in the process of kicking off now.
Fast roaming now
In  the meantime of course, there are proprietary solutions. The two parts  that need to be speeded up to cut down outage times are the scanning  process (to allow clients to find new suitable APs to associate to),  and, specifically for security, a faster way of reauthenicating to cut  out the RADIUS request/response process. There are things that can be  done to speed up the time it takes for a client to find another suitable  AP. An AP can maintain information on its adjacent APs, which it can  pass to a client on request—this will give the client a better  indication of usable channels to scan, for example. The biggest time  saver, however, is reckoned to be in localising the 802.1x  authentication process. Cisco has incorporated Fast Secure Roaming into  its Wireless Domain Services (WDS) portfolio as part of its Structured  Wireless Aware Networking offering, which in effect allows an AP on each  local subnet to act as the authenticator for clients. When a client (or  other AP) goes through the initial RADIUS authentication, it does it  via one AP running WDS. This lets that AP establish shared keys between  itself and every other entity in the L2 domain, and allows for quicker  reauthentication. Plans are for this capability to be included in  Cisco’s router/switch platforms later this year as part of its SWAN  development. Symbol provides similar functionality in its hardware,  while Airespace) also caters for fast roaming in its wireless switches  and appliances, and companies such as Bluesocket, which use gateways to  control pretty dumb APs, manage everything centrally. Proxim handles  things differently, pre-authenticating clients to nearby APs as well as  the one currently in use in preparation for the client moving. So before  you get excited about Layer 3 roaming, make sure you understand how  your vendor of choice implements it at Layer 2. If that bit’s not fast  enough to stop you losing traffic, you’ll never be able to move across  subnets. It’s likely to be years before there’s a usable standard in  place and in the meantime while you can probably get APs from different  vendors to work together, there’s no guarantee of interoperability if  you want to turn on their various fast roaming options.
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)



 



0 comments:
Posting Komentar