[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-gundavelli-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 RFC 6909

NETEXT WG                                             S. Gundavelli, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                     Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track                                 X. Zhou
Expires: April 24, 2013                                  ZTE Corporation
                                                             J. Korhonen
                                                  Nokia Siemens Networks
                                                                G. Feige
                                                               R. Koodli
                                                                   Cisco
                                                        October 21, 2012


       IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6
              draft-ietf-netext-pmipv6-sipto-option-07.txt

Abstract

   This specification defines a traffic offload mechanism and a related
   mobility option for carrying IPv4 Offload traffic selectors between a
   mobile access gateway and a local mobility anchor in a Proxy Mobile
   IPv6 domain.  Based on the negotiated IPv4 traffic offload flow
   selectors with the local mobility anchor, a mobile access gateway can
   enable offload traffic rule on the selected IPv4 flows.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 24, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents



Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions and Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.1.  Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     2.2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Solution Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.1.  LMA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.2.  MAG Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   4.  IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   5.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.  Protocol Configuration Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   7.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   8.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   9.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     9.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     9.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
























Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


1.  Introduction

   Mobile Operators are expanding their network coverage by integrating
   various access technology domains (Ex: Wireless LAN, CDMA, LTE) into
   a common IP mobility core.  The 3GPP S2a Proxy Mobile IPv6 [TS23402]
   reference point, specified by the 3GPP system architecture defines
   the protocol inter-working for building such integrated multi-access
   network.  In this scenario, the mobile node's IP traffic is always
   tunneled back from the mobile access gateway [RFC5213] in the access
   network to the local mobility anchor in the home network.  Currently,
   there is no mechanism for allowing some of the subscriber's IP flows
   to be offloaded in the access network.

   With the exponential growth in the mobile data traffic, mobile
   operators are exploring new ways to offload some of the IP traffic
   flows at the nearest access edge.  The offload is intended either for
   local service access in the access network, or for internet offload
   through the access network when there is an internet peering point.
   Not all IP traffic flows needs to be routed back to the home network,
   some of the non-essential traffic which does not require IP mobility
   support can be offloaded at the mobile access gateway in the access
   network.  This approach allows efficient usage of the mobile packet
   core which helps in lowering transport costs.  The local mobility
   anchor in the home network can deliver the IP flow policy to the
   mobile access gateway in the access network, for identifying the IP
   flows that need to be offloaded.  Example of such non-essential
   traffic is entirely a policy decision.  A given operator may choose
   to offload all traffic except that which requires QoS services (Ex:
   Voice over IP traffic), or may choose to offload all HTTP traffic.
   From the point of view of this specification, its only about IPv4
   traffic matching a given flow selector and classification for
   offload.  This approach has one limitation with respect to
   identifying encrypted traffic.  IPsec encrypted traffic with no
   visibility into the application payload cannot be selected for
   offload.

   This document defines a new mobility option, IPv4 Traffic Offload
   Selector option for Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6).  This option can be
   used by the local mobility anchor for delivering the IPv4 traffic
   offload policy associated with a mobility session to the mobile
   access gateway.  This IPv4 traffic offload policy identifies the flow
   selectors that can used for selecting the flows for offloading them
   at the access edge.  Since, the mobile node's IP address
   topologically belongs to the home network, the offloaded IPv4 traffic
   flows may need to be NAT [RFC2663] translated.  These offloaded flows
   will not have mobility support as the NAT becomes the anchor point
   for those flows.  However, when the traffic is offloaded for local
   service access as opposed to internet offload, NAT translation may



Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


   not be needed, if the mobile access gateways is in path for the
   return traffic.  The decision on when to apply NAT translation can be
   based on local configuration on the mobile access gateway.  There are
   better ways to address the offload problem for IPv6 and with the goal
   not to create NAT66 requirement, this specification therefore does
   not support traffic offload support for IPv6 flows.  An IPv6 enabled
   mobile node can be assigned multiple IPv6 prefixes, some from the
   access network and the other from the home network.  If there is
   proper prefix coloring marking in the Router Advertisement messages
   which allows the mobile node to identify the IPv6 prefix assigned
   from the local access network, it can choose to use an address from
   that prefix for IP traffic flows that require offload.  There is
   active work in IETF for addressing the prefix coloring related
   enhancements.  This document also does not define any new semantics
   for flow selectors.  The flow identification and the related
   semantics are all leveraged from [RFC6088] and [RFC6089].


2.  Conventions and Terminology

2.1.  Conventions

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

2.2.  Terminology

   All the mobility related terms used in this document are to be
   interpreted as defined in the base Proxy Mobile IPv6 specifications
   [RFC5213] and [RFC5844].  Additionally, this document uses the
   following abbreviations:

   IP Flow

      IP Flow represents a set of IP packets that match a traffic
      selector.  The selector is typically based on the source IP
      address, destination IP address, source port, destination port and
      other fields in upper layer headers.

   IP Traffic Offload

      The approach of selecting specific IP flows and routing them
      through the access network, instead of tunneling them to the home
      network.  Offload can also be between two access networks
      (Example: moving some of the traffic from LTE access to WLAN
      access).




Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


   NAT (Network Address Translation)

      Network Address Translation [RFC2663] is a method by which IP
      addresses are mapped from one address realm to another, providing
      transparent routing to end hosts.


3.  Solution Overview

   The following illustrates the scenario where the mobile access
   gateway in an access network has enabled IPv4 traffic offload support
   for a mobility session.  The offload decision is based on the IPv4
   traffic offload policy that it received from the local mobility
   anchor in the home network.  For example, all the HTTP flows may be
   offloaded at the mobile access gateway and all the other flows for
   that mobility session are tunneled back to the local mobility anchor.
   The offloaded flows have to be typically NAT translated and this
   specification does not impose any restrictions on the location of the
   NAT function.  It is possible, the NAT function is co-located with
   the mobile access gateway, or its located some where in the edge of
   the access network.  When the NAT is not collocated on the mobile
   access gateway, the NAT function should have the ability to identify
   the offloaded IP traffic for NAT policy enforcement.  This could be
   achieved by configuring a specific VLAN between the mobile access
   gateway and the NAT device and ensuring all the traffic on that VLAN
   is NAT translated.  This can also be achieved through other means and
   the details are outside the scope of this document.  It is also to be
   noted that the NAT translation is not required if the offloaded IPv4
   flows are for local service access.

   The IPv4 traffic selectors that are delivered to the mobile access
   gateway can be used to classify the traffic, so it can be offloaded
   to the access network.  The parameters in the IP traffic selectors
   can be used to match against the header fields in the data packets.
   These parameters include Source IP address, Destination IP address,
   TCP/UDP Port numbers, and other fields.  The format of the IPv4
   Binary Traffic Selector is specified in section 3.1 of [RFC6088].














Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


            _----_
          _(      )_
         ( Internet )
          (_      _)
            '----'
              |
              :
   (IPv4 Traffic Offload Point)
              :
              |
   .........................................................
              |                              |
   +--------+ |                   +---------------------+
   |  Local | |                   | Services requiring  |
   |Services| |                   | mobility, or service|
   +--------+ |                   | treatment           |
        |     |                   +---------------------+
        |   +---+                            |
        |   |NAT|                            |
        |   +---+                            |
        +-----|            _----_            |
           +-----+       _(      )_       +-----+
   [MN]----| MAG |======(    IP    )======| LMA |-- Internet
           +-----+       (_      _)       +-----+
                           '----'
                              .
                              .
       [Access Network]       .        [Home Network]
   ..........................................................

             Figure 1: IPv4 Traffic Offload Support at the MAG

   Figure 2 explains the operational sequence of the Proxy Mobile IPv6
   protocol signaling message exchange between the mobile access gateway
   and the local mobility anchor for negotiating the IPv4 Traffic
   Offload selectors.  The details related to DHCP transactions, or
   Router Advertisements on the access link are not shown here as that
   is not the key focus of this specification.













Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


   MN    MAG(NAT)   LMA
   |------>|        |    1. Mobile Node Attach
   |       |------->|    2. Proxy Binding Update (IPv4TS)
   |       |<-------|    3. Proxy Binding Acknowledgement (IPv4TS)
   |       |========|    4. Tunnel/Route Setup
   |       +        |    5. Installing the traffic offload rules
   |------>|        |    6. IPv4 packet from mobile node
   |       +        |    7. Forwarding rule - Tunnel home/offload
   |       |        |


           Figure 2: Exchange of IPv4 Traffic Offload Selectors

3.1.  LMA Considerations

   The following considerations apply to the local mobility anchor.

   o  If the configuration variable, EnableIPTrafficOffloadSupport
      (Section 6) on the local mobility anchor is set to a value of (0),
      then the local mobility anchor MUST NOT include the IPv4 Traffic
      Offload Selector option (Section 4) in the Proxy Binding
      Acknowledgement message.  It MUST ignore any IPv4 Traffic Offload
      Selector option present in the received Proxy Binding Update and
      process the rest of the message as per [RFC5213].  This would have
      no effect on the operation of the rest of the protocol.

   o  If the received Proxy Binding Update includes the IPv4 Traffic
      Offload Selector option (Section 4), and if the configuration
      variable, EnableIPTrafficOffloadSupport (Section 6) on the local
      mobility anchor is set to a value of (1), then the local mobility
      anchor can acquire the offload policy from a network function (Ex:
      AAA, or PCRF (Policy Charging and Rules Function)) and can
      construct the traffic selectors based on the offload policy and
      deliver that traffic offload policy in the Proxy Binding
      Acknowledgement message using the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector
      option.  The specific details on how the offload policy for a
      mobile node is provisioned on the local mobility anchor is out of
      the scope for this document.  However, if the received Proxy
      Binding Update included a proposed Offload traffic policy, the
      local mobility anchor MAY choose to honor that request and reflect
      the proposed selectors in the reply.

   o  If the received Proxy Binding Update does not include the IPv4
      Traffic Offload Selector option (Section 4), and if the
      configuration variable, EnableIPTrafficOffloadSupport (Section 6)
      on the local mobility anchor is set to a value of (1), then the
      local mobility anchor SHOULD NOT include the IP Traffic Offload
      Selector option in the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement.



Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


3.2.  MAG Considerations

   o  If the configuration variable, EnableIPTrafficOffloadSupport on
      the mobile access gateway is set to a value of (0), then the
      mobile access gateway MUST NOT include the IPv4 Traffic Offload
      Selector option (Section 4) in the Proxy Binding Update message
      that it sends to the local mobility anchor.

   o  If the configuration variable, EnableIPTrafficOffloadSupport on
      the mobile access gateway is set to a value of (1), then the
      mobile access gateway MUST include the IPv4 Traffic Offload
      Selector option (Section 4) in the Proxy Binding Update message.
      The following considerations apply with respect to including the
      Traffic Selector Sub-option in the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector
      option.

      *  The mobile access gateway MAY choose not to propose any
         specific IPv4 traffic offload policy.  In that scenario, there
         MUST NOT be any Traffic Selector sub-option in the IPv4 Traffic
         Offload Selector option.  Including the IPv4 Traffic Offload
         Selector option in the Proxy Binding Update, but without the
         Traffic Selector Sub-option serves as an indication that the
         mobile access gateway is not proposing any specific offload
         policy for that mobility session, but a request to the local
         mobility anchor to provide the IPv4 traffic offload flow
         selectors for that mobility session.  The (M) flag in the
         option MUST be set to value of (0).

      *  The mobile access gateway MAY choose to include its proposed
         IPv4 traffic offload policy.  This policy may be locally
         configured at the mobile access gateway, or may have been
         obtained from the AAA.  In that scenario, the Traffic Selector
         sub-option MUST be present in the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector
         option (Section 4).  Including the offload traffic selector
         sub-option serves as a proposal to the local mobility anchor,
         which the local mobility anchor can override with its own
         offload policy, or agree to the proposed policy.  When
         including the offload traffic selectors, the Traffic Selector
         sub-option MUST be constructed as specified section 4.2.1.4 of
         [RFC6089].  This sub-option includes a Traffic Selector Format
         field, which identifies the format of the flow specification
         included in that sub-option.  The values for that field and the
         corresponding message format are defined in section 3.0 of
         [RFC6088]

   o  If there is no IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the
      corresponding Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message, that the
      mobile access gateway receives in response to a Proxy Binding



Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


      Update, it serves as an indication that the local mobility anchor
      did not enable IPv4 Traffic Offload support for that mobility
      session, and hence the local mobility anchor did not deliver IPv4
      flow selectors for that mobility session.  The mobile access
      gateway upon accepting the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message
      MUST NOT enable any IPv4 traffic offload support for that mobility
      session.  All the mobile node's IPv4 flows MUST be tunneled back
      to the local mobility anchor.

   o  If there is an IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the
      corresponding Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message, the mobile
      access gateway SHOULD enable the IPv4 traffic offload support for
      that mobility session.  It MUST process the Traffic Selector Sub-
      option for the flow selectors.

      *  If the (M) flag of the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in
         the received Proxy Binding Acknowledgement is set to a value
         (0), then the mobile access gateway SHOULD offload all the
         mobile node's IPv4 flows identified using the flow selectors
         present in the Traffic Selector Sub-option.  The mobile access
         gateway SHOULD tunnel all other mobile node's IPv4 flows to the
         local mobility anchor.

      *  If the (M) flag of the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in
         the received Proxy Binding Acknowledgement is set to a value
         (1), then the mobile access gateway SHOULD offload all the
         mobile node's IPv4 flows, except the IPv4 flows identified
         using the flow selectors present in the Traffic Selector Sub-
         option.

   o  If configuration variable, EnableIPTrafficOffloadSupport is set to
      a value of (0), and if the mobile access gateway has not included
      the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the Proxy Binding
      Update, but if the received Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message
      has the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option, then the mobile
      access gateway SHOULD ignore the option and process the rest of
      the message as per [RFC5213].


4.  IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option

   A new mobility option, IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option, is
   defined for using it in Proxy Binding Update (PBU) and Proxy Binding
   Acknowledgement (PBA) messages exchanged between a mobile access
   gateway and a local mobility anchor.  This option is used for
   carrying the IPv4 traffic offload policy.  This policy identifies the
   IPv4 traffic flow selectors that can be used by the IPv4 traffic
   offload function at the mobile access gateway.



Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


   The alignment requirement for this option is 4n.


   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
                                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                   |      Type     |   Length      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |M|                         Reserved                            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Traffic Selector Sub-option   ...
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


              Figure 3: IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option

   Type
      <IANA-1>

   Length
      8-bit unsigned integer indicating the length in octets of the
      option, excluding the type and length fields.

   Reserved
      This field is unused for now.  The value MUST be initialized to 0
      by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver.

   Offload Mode Flag
      This field indicates the offload mode.

         If the (M) flag value is set to a value of (0), it is an
         indication that the identified IPv4 flow(s) in this mobility
         option SHOULD be offloaded at the mobile access gateway and all
         other IPv4 flows associated with that mobility session need to
         be tunneled to the local mobility anchor.

         If the (M) flag value is set to a value of (1), it is an
         indication that all the IPv4 flows associated to that mobility
         session except the identified IPv4 flow(s) in the Traffic
         Selector sub-option that follows SHOULD be offloaded at the
         mobile access gateway.

   Traffic Selector Sub-option
      The traffic selector sub-option includes the parameters used to
      match packets for a specific flow binding.  This is an optional
      field when this option is used only a capability hint.  The format
      of the Traffic Selector sub-option is defined in section 4.2.1.4
      of [RFC6089].  This sub-option includes a TS Format field, which



Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


      identifies the format of the flow specification included in that
      sub-option.  The values for that field are defined in section 3 of
      [RFC6089] and are repeated here for completeness.  When the value
      of TS Format field is set to (1), the format that follows is the
      IPv4 Binary Traffic Selector specified in section 3.1 of [RFC6088]
      and that support is mandatory for this specification.

         1: IPv4 binary traffic selector.

         2: IPv6 binary traffic selector (Not used by this
         specification)


5.  IANA Considerations

   This document requires the following IANA action.

   o  Action-1: This specification defines a new mobility header option,
      IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option.  This option is described in
      Section 4.  The Type value for this option needs to be assigned
      from the same numbering space as allocated for the other mobility
      options [RFC6275].


6.  Protocol Configuration Variables

   This specification defines the following configuration variable that
   control the IPv4 Traffic Offload support feature.  The mobility
   entities, local mobility anchor and the mobile access gateway MUST
   allow these variables to be configured by the system management.  The
   configured values for these protocol variables MUST survive server
   reboots and service restarts.

   EnableIPTrafficOffloadSupport

         This flag indicates whether or not IPv4 Traffic Offload support
         needs to be enabled.  This configuration variable is available
         at both in the mobile access gateway and at the local mobility
         anchor.  The default value for this flag is set to (0),
         indicating that the support for IPv4 Traffic offload support is
         disabled.

         When this flag on the mobile access gateway is set to a value
         of (1), the mobile access gateway MUST enable the IPv4 Traffic
         offload support for all mobility sessions, specifically it MUST
         request the IPv4 traffic offload policy from the local mobility
         anchor by including the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in
         the Proxy Binding Update message.  If the flag is set to a



Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


         value of (0), the mobile access gateway MUST NOT enable IPv4
         Traffic Offload support for any mobility session.  It MUST NOT
         include the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the Proxy
         Binding Update.

         Similarly, when this flag on the local mobility anchor is set
         to a value of (1), the local mobility anchor MUST enable
         support for IPv4 Traffic offload support.  When the local
         mobility anchor chooses to enable IPv4 Traffic offload support
         and if there is offload flow policy specified for a mobile
         node, it SHOULD deliver the IPv4 traffic offload policy to the
         mobile access gateway by including the IPv4 Traffic Offload
         Selector option in the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message.


7.  Security Considerations

   The IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option defined in this
   specification is for use in Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding
   Acknowledgement messages.  This option is carried like any other
   mobility header option as specified in [RFC5213] and does not require
   any special security considerations.  Carrying IPv4 traffic offload
   selectors does not introduce any new security vulnerabilities.

   When IPv4 traffic offload support is enabled for a mobile node, the
   mobile access gateway selectively offloads some of the mobile node's
   IPv4 traffic flows to the access network.  Typically, these offloaded
   flows get NAT translated and essentially that introduces certain
   vulnerabilities which are common to any NAT deployment.  These
   vulnerabilities and the related considerations have been well
   documented in the NAT specification [RFC2663].  There are no
   additional considerations above and beyond what has already been
   documented by the NAT specifications and which are unique to the
   approach specified in this document.


8.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Ahmad Muhanna, Basavaraj Patil,
   Carlos Bernardos, Eric Voit, Frank Brockners, Hidetoshi Yokota, Marco
   Liebsch, Mark Grayson, Pierrick Seite, Ryuji Wakikawa, Steve Wood and
   Brian Haberman for all the discussions related to the topic of IPv4
   traffic offload.


9.  References





Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC5213]  Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
              and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.

   [RFC5844]  Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
              Mobile IPv6", RFC 5844, May 2010.

   [RFC6088]  Tsirtsis, G., Giarreta, G., Soliman, H., and N. Montavont,
              "Traffic Selectors for Flow Bindings", RFC 6088,
              January 2011.

   [RFC6089]  Tsirtsis, G., Soliman, H., Montavont, N., Giaretta, G.,
              and K. Kuladinithi, "Flow Bindings in Mobile IPv6 and
              Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support", RFC 6089,
              January 2011.

   [RFC6275]  Perkins, C., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.

9.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2663]  Srisuresh, P. and M. Holdrege, "IP Network Address
              Translator (NAT) Terminology and Considerations",
              RFC 2663, August 1999.

   [TS23402]  3GPP, "Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP accesses",
              2010.


Authors' Addresses

   Sri Gundavelli (editor)
   Cisco
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   Email: sgundave@cisco.com









Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                [Page 13]

Internet-Draft    IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option      October 2012


   Xingyue Zhou
   ZTE Corporation
   No.68 Zijinghua Rd
   Nanjing
   China

   Email: zhou.xingyue@zte.com.cn


   Jouni Korhonen
   Nokia Siemens Networks
   Linnoitustie 6
   Espoo  FIN-02600
   Finland

   Email: jouni.nospam@gmail.com


   Gaetan
   Cisco
   France

   Email: gfeige@cisco.com


   Rajeev Koodli
   Cisco
   3650 Cisco Way
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   Email: rkoodli@cisco.com



















Gundavelli, et al.       Expires April 24, 2013                [Page 14]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/