[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 draft-ietf-sfc-use-case-mobility

Service Function Chaining                                    W. Haeffner
Internet-Draft                                                  Vodafone
Intended status: Informational                                 J. Napper
Expires: November 6, 2014                                  Cisco Systems
                                                          M. Stiemerling
                                                                     NEC
                                                                D. Lopez
                                                          Telefonica I+D
                                                               J. Uttaro
                                                                    AT&T
                                                             May 5, 2014


         Service Function Chaining Use Cases in Mobile Networks
                draft-haeffner-sfc-use-case-mobility-02

Abstract

   This document provides some exemplary use cases for service function
   chaining in mobile service provider networks.  The objective of this
   draft is not to cover all conceivable service chains in detail.
   Rather, the intention is to localize and explain the application
   domain of service chaining within mobile networks as far as it is
   required to complement the problem statement and framework statements
   of the working group.

   Service function chains typically reside in a LAN segment which links
   the mobile access network to the actual application platforms located
   in the carrier's datacenters or somewhere else in the Internet.
   Service function chains ensure a fair distribution of network
   resources according to agreed service policies, enhance the
   performance of service delivery, take care of security and privacy or
   support application and business support platforms.  General
   considerations and specific use cases are presented in this document
   to demonstrate the different technical requirements of these goals
   for service function chaining in mobile service provider networks.

   The specification of service function chaining for mobile networks
   must take into account an interaction between service function chains
   and the 3GPP Policy and Charging Control (PCC) environment.

Requirements Language

   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 [RFC2119].





Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


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 November 6, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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
   (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
     1.1.  Terminology and abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  General scope of mobile service chains  . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.3.  General structure of end-to-end carrier networks  . . . .   5
   2.  Mobile network overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.1.  Building blocks of 3GPP mobile networks . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.2.  Overview of mobile service chains . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     2.3.  The most common classification scheme . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.4.  More sophisticated classification schemes . . . . . . . .  10
   3.  Example use cases specific to mobile networks . . . . . . . .  11
     3.1.  Service chain model for Internet HTTP services  . . . . .  11
       3.1.1.  Weaknesses of current approaches  . . . . . . . . . .  15
     3.2.  Service chain for TCP optimization  . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       3.2.1.  Weaknesses of current approaches  . . . . . . . . . .  16



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


     3.3.  HTTP header enrichment in mobile networks . . . . . . . .  16
   4.  Remarks on QoS in mobile networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   5.  Weaknesses of current implementations . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     5.1.  Granularity of the classification scheme  . . . . . . . .  18
     5.2.  Service chain implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   6.  Operator requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     6.1.  Simplicity of service function chain instantiation  . . .  19
     6.2.  Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     6.3.  Delimitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   9.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22

1.  Introduction

1.1.  Terminology and abbreviations

   Much of the terminology used in this document has been defined by the
   3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), which defines standards
   for mobile service provider networks.  Although a few terms are
   defined here for convenience, further terms can be found in
   [RFC6459].

   UE User equipment like tablets or smartphones

   eNB  enhanced NodeB, radio access part of the LTE system

   S-GW  Serving Gateway, primary function is user plane mobility

   P-GW  Packet Gateway, actual service creation point, terminates 3GPP
      mobile network, interface to Packet Data Networks (PDN)

   HSS  Home Subscriber System (control plane element)

   MME  Mobility Management Entity (control plane element)

   GTP  GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) Tunnel Protocol

   S-IP  Source IP address

   D-IP  Destination IP address

   IMSI  The International Mobile Subscriber Identity that identifies a
      mobile subscriber



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   (S)Gi  Egress termination point of the mobile network (SGi in case of
      LTE, Gi in case of UMTS/HSPA).  The internal data structure of
      this interface is not standardized by 3GPP

   PCRF  3GPP standardized Policy and Charging Rules Function

1.2.  General scope of mobile service chains

   Mobile access networks terminate at a mobile service creation point
   (Packet Gateway) typically located at the edge of an operator IP
   backbone.  From the user equipment (UE) up to the Packet Gateway
   (P-GW) everything is fully standardized by the 3rd Generation
   Partnership Project (3GPP) e.g., in [TS.23.401].  Within the mobile
   network, the user payload is encapsulated in 3GPP specific tunnels
   terminating eventually at the P-GW.  In many cases application-
   specific IP traffic is not directly exchanged between the original
   mobile network, more specific the P-GW, and an application platform,
   but will be forced to pass a set of service functions.  Those
   application platforms are, for instance, a web server environment, a
   video platform, a social networking platform or some other multimedia
   platform.  Network operators use these service functions to
   differentiate their services to their subscribers.  Service function
   chaining is thus integral to the business model of operators.

   Important use cases classes for service function chains generally
   include:

   1.  functions to protect the carrier network and the privacy of its
       users(IDS, FW, ACL, encryption, decryption, etc.),

   2.  functions that ensure the contracted quality of experience using
       e.g., performance enhancement proxies (PEP) like video
       optimizers, TCP optimizers or functions guaranteeing fair service
       delivery based on policy based QoS mechanisms,

   3.  functions like HTTP header enrichment that may be used to
       identify and charge subscribers real time,

   4.  functions like CG-NAT/PAT, which are required solely for
       technical reasons, and

   5.  functions like parental control or malware detection that may be
       a cost option of a service offer.








Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


1.3.  General structure of end-to-end carrier networks

   Altough this memo is focused on the Service Function Chaining use
   cases for mobile carrier networks, such as 3GPP- based ones, a number
   of other, different carrier networks exists that share similarities
   in the structure of the access networks and the service functions
   with mobile networks.

   Figure 1 shows 4 different carrier networks as examples to show
   similarities with respect to Service Functions and their Chaining.

   The service networks consist of access-specific user equipment, a
   dedicated access network, a related service creation point and
   finally a (LAN) infrastructure hosting Service Functions which
   finally interconnect to application platforms in the Internet or in
   the carrier's own datacenter (DC).

   From top to down, there is a 3GPP mobile network terminating at the
   P-GW, a xDSL network with its PPP tunnels terminating at a BNG
   (Broadband Network Gateway), a FTTH network terminating at an OLT
   (optical line terminal) and finally a cable TV network terminating at
   a CMTS (cable modem termination system).

           Access             Service Functions (Categories)
          Services            +---------------------------+
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  |+--1---+ +--2---+ +--3---+|| +---------+
   |UE|--| 3GGP  |---| P-GW|--|| NAT  | | MWD  | | TCP   || |Internal |
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  || .    | |      | | Opt.  ||-|Appl.    |
                              || FW   | | Par. | | .     || |Platforms|
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  || .    | | Ctrl | | Video || |(e.g.IMS)|
   |UE|--| xDSL  |---| BNG |--|| LB   | | .    | | Opt.  || +---------+
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  || .    | | LI   | | .     ||
                              || DPI  | | .    | | Head. ||
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  || .    | | .    | | Enr.  || +---------+
   |UE|--| FTTH  |---| OLT |--|| .    | |      | | .     || |         |
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  || .    | |      | | .     ||-|Internet |
                              || .    | |      | |       || |         |
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  ||      | |      | |       || |         |
   |UE|--|  CATV |---| CMTS|--||      | |      | |       || +---------+
   +--+  *~~~~~~~*   +-----+  |+------+ +------+ +-------+|
                              +---------------------------+

   Figure 1: Various end-to-end carrier networks and service functions.

   Category 1 of service functions like NAT or DPI may be used by all of
   these service networks mainly just (but not exclusively) for
   technical reasons.  The same is true for category 2, value added
   services (VAS) like parental control, malware detection and



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   elimination (MWD) or legal intercept (LI).  TCP optimization is
   basically seen in mobile networks only, the same may be true for
   video optimizers or HTTP header enrichment, i.e., category 3 as a
   rule mainly belongs to mobile networks only.

   In our view, 3GPP-based mobile networks seem to have the largest
   demand for service functions and service function chains.  Service
   Function Chains used in other access networks are very likely a
   subset of what one can except in 3GPP-based mobile networks.

2.  Mobile network overview

   For simplicity we only describe service function chaining in the
   context of LTE (Long Term Evolution) networks.  But indeed our
   service chaining model also applies to earlier generations of mobile
   networks, such as purely UMTS-based mobile networks.

2.1.  Building blocks of 3GPP mobile networks

   The major functional components of a LTE network are shown in
   Figure 2 and include user equipment (UE) like smartphones or tablets,
   the LTE radio unit named enhanced NodeB (eNB), the serving gateway
   (S-GW) which together with the mobility management entity (MME) takes
   care of mobility and the packet gateway (P-GW), which finally
   terminates the actual mobile service.  These elements are described
   in detail in [TS.23.401].  Other important components are the home
   subscriber system (HSS) and the policy and charging rule function
   (PCRF), which are described in [TS.23.203].  The P-GW interface
   towards the SGi-LAN is called the SGi-interface, which is described
   in [TS.29.061] and finally the SGi-LAN is the home of service
   function chains (SFC), which are not standardized by 3GPP.




















Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   +--------------------------------------------+
   | Control Plane (C)      [HSS]               |   [OTT Appl. Platform]
   |                          |                 |             |
   |               +--------[MME]       [PCRF]--+--------+ Internet
   |               |          |            |    |        |    |
   |  [UE-C] -- [eNB-C] == [S-GW-C] == [P-GW-C] |        |    |
   +=====|=========|==========|============|====+  +-----+----+-------+
   |     |         |          |            |    |  |     |    |       |
   |  [UE-U] -- [eNB-U] == [S-GW-U] == [P-GW-U]-+--+----[SGi-LAN]     |
   |                                            |  |        |         |
   |                                            |  |        |         |
   |                                            |  | [Appl. Platform] |
   |                                            |  |                  |
   | User Plane (U)                             |  |                  |
   +--------------------------------------------+  +--- IP Backbone --+

   |<----------- 3GPP Mobile Network ---------->|

   Figure 2 shows the end to end context including all major components
   of a LTE network.  The actual 3GPP mobile network includes the
   elements from the user equipment [UE] to the packet gateway [P-GW].

   Figure 2: End to end context including all major components of a LTE
    network.  The actual 3GPP mobile network includes the elements from
           the user equipment [UE] to the packet gateway [P-GW].

   The radio-based IP traffic between the UE and the eNB is encrypted
   according 3GPP standards.  Between eNB, S-GW, P-GW user IP packets as
   well as control plane packets are encapsulated in 3GPP-specific
   tunnels.  In some mobile carrier networks the 3GPP specific tunnels
   between eNB and S-GW are even additionally IPSec-encrypted.  For more
   details see [TS.29.281] and [TS.29.274].

   Service function chains act on user plane IP traffic only.  But the
   way these act on user traffic may depend on subscriber, service or
   network specific control plane metadata.

2.2.  Overview of mobile service chains

   The original user IP packet, including the Source-IP-Address (S-IP)
   of the UE and the Destination-IP-Address (D-IP) of the addressed
   application platform, leaves the Packet Gateway from the mobile
   network via the so-called Gi-interface (3G service, e.g., UMTS)
   respectively SGi-interface (4G service, e.g., LTE).  Between this (S
   )Gi-interface and the actual application platform the user generated
   upstream IP packets and the corresponding downstream IP packets are
   typically forced to pass an ordered set of service functions, loosely
   called a service function chain (SFC).



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   The set of all available service functions (physical or virtualized)
   which can be used to establish different service chains for different
   services is often called a Gi-LAN for 2G/3G services and SGi-LAN for
   4G services.

   The (S)Gi-interface towards the (S)Gi-LAN itself is discussed in
   [TS.29.061], but service function chaining is not specified by 3GPP.

   The (S)Gi-LAN service functions can use subscriber and service
   related metadata delivered from the mobile control plane, such as the
   PCRF, to process the flows according to service related policies.

   In short, the (S)Gi-LAN service area is presently used by mobile
   service providers to differentiate their services to their
   subscribers and reflect the business model and of mobile operators.

   For different applications (e.g., Appl. 1,2,3) upstream and
   downstream user plane IP flows will be forced to pass a sequence of
   service functions which is called a service chain specific to a given
   application.  In the simple example sketched in Figure 3 the service
   chains for applications 1, 2 and 3 may be just classified by a unique
   interface-ID of the egress P-GW interfaces where the service chains
   for application 1, 2 and 3 are attached.

   +------------------------------------------------------------------+
   | Control Plane Environment   [HSS]   [MME]   [PCRF]   [others]    |
   +------------------------------------------------|-----------------+
                               +--------------------+
   +---------------------------|--------------------|-----------------+
   | User Plane Environment    |                    |                 |
   |                           | +------(S)Gi-LAN --+-----+           |
   |                           | |                        |           |
   |                           | |  +---[SF1]-[SF3]-[SF5]---[Appl. 1] |
   |                           | | /                      |           |
   | [UE]---[eNB]===[S-GW]===[P-GW]-----[SF2]-[SF4]-[SF6]--------+    |
   |                           |   \                      |      |    |
   |                           |    +---[SF7]-[SF8]-[SF9]-----+  |    |
   |                           |                          |   |  |    |
   |                           +--------------------------+   |  |    |
   |                                                          |  |    |
   +----------------------------------------------------------|--|----+
                                                              |  |
                                             OTT Internet Applications
                                                |                |
                                            [Appl. 2]         [Appl. 3]

                 Figure 3: Typical service chain topology.




Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   Service functions typically observe, alter or even terminate and
   reestablish application session flows between mobile user equipment
   and application platforms.  Control plane metadata supporting policy
   based traffic handling may be linked to individual service functions
   SFn.  Because in Figure 3 the P-GW classifies service chains, we
   consider the P-GW as a component of the service chaining environment.

2.3.  The most common classification scheme

   Mobile user equipment like smartphones, tablets or other mobile
   devices address use Access Point Names (APNs) to address a service
   network or service platform.  APNs are DNS host names and comparable
   to FQDN host names.  While a FQDN refers to an Internet IP address,
   an APN (loosely speaking) specifies a P-GW IP address.  These APNs
   are used to distinguish certain user groups and their traffic, e.g.,
   there can be an APN for a mobile service offered to the general
   public while enterprise customers get their own APN.  For APN details
   see [TS.23.003].

   Operators often associate a designated VLAN-ID with an APN.  A VLAN-
   ID n then may classify the service function chain n (SFC n) related
   to an application platform n (Appl. n), as shown in the following
   Figure 4.

         +----------+
         |          |
         |     IF-1 O [APN 1 => VLAN-ID 1] ---- [SFC 1] ---- [Appl. 1]
         |          |
    =====|    P-GW  O . . . .
         |          |
         |     IF-n O [APN n => VLAN-ID n] ---- [SFC n] ---- [Appl. n]
         |          |
         +----------+

   Figure 4: Association of a service chain to an application platform.

   Examples for an APN are, e.g.:

                     +------------+-----------------+
                     | APN:       | web.vodafone.de |
                     | User Name: | not required    |
                     | Password:  | not required    |
                     +------------+-----------------+

                 Table 1: Example APN for Vodafone Germany






Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


                     +------------+------------------+
                     | APN:       | internet.telekom |
                     | User Name: | t-mobile         |
                     | Password:  | tm               |
                     +------------+------------------+

            Table 2: Example APN for Deutsche Telekom/T-Mobile

2.4.  More sophisticated classification schemes

   More sophisticated classifications are feasible using metadata that
   is UE related, subscriber and service related, as well as network
   related metadata.  Typical metadata and their sources are:

   UE:  terminal type (e.g., HTC one); IMSI (country, carrier, user);

   GTP tunnel endpoint:  eNB-Identifier; time;

   PCRF:  subscriber info; APN (service name); QoS; policy rules.

   Mobile operator defined subscriber, service or network specific
   policies are typically encoded in the 3GPP-based "policy and charging
   rules function" (PCRF), see [TS.23.203].  For instance, a PCRF may
   encode the rules that apply to pre-paid and post-paid users, users
   with a classification of gold, silver, or bronze, or even as detailed
   as describing rules that apply to "gold users, wishing to download a
   video file, while these subscribers are subjected to a fair-usage
   policy".  It is up to the mobile service providers to encode the
   precise mappings between its subscriber classes and the associated
   service chains.

   The Traffic Detection Function (TDF) is part of the 3GPP PCC (Policy
   and Charging Architecture, [TS.23.203]).  Such a TDF inspects the
   user traffic after leaving the PGW (see Figure 4).  The TDF can be
   used to classify traffic originating from an APN into more detailed
   services.  This could be used to classify traffic into different
   Service Functions.














Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


             +-------------------------+
             |          PCRF           |
             +----+--------------+-----+
                  |              |
                Gx-IF          Sd-IF
                  |              |
             +----+-----+   +----+-----+
   ==========O  [PCEF]  |   |  [TDF]   O--------[SFC 1] ---- [Appl. 1]
             |          |   |          O--------[SFC 2] ---- [Appl. 2]
   ==========O   P-GW   O---O SGi-LAN  O--------[SFC 3] ---- [Appl. 3]
             |          |   |          O--------[SFC 4] ---- [Appl. 4]
   ==========O          |   |          O--------[SFC n] ---- [Appl. n]
             +----------+   +----------+
                        *              *
   3GPP Bearer         SGi            SGi

    Figure 5: 3GPP Traffic Detection Function (TDF) for classification.

   The TDF will typically observe the traffic on all layers.  On
   application start and stop the TDF provides feedback to the PCRF for
   further actions to be taken on a particular flow.  The PCRF can
   request that the TDF apply application and detection controls to
   application flows including charging and usage monitoring.  The TDF
   can also act without any interaction with the PCRF taking care of
   gating (firewalling), traffic redirection, bandwidth management or
   charging.

3.  Example use cases specific to mobile networks

   Because HTTP via TCP port 80 (or TCP port 443 for HTTPS) is by far
   the most common Internet traffic class, we discuss two typical
   examples of an associated service function chaining model in some
   more detail.

   The models presented below are simplified compared to real life
   service function chain implementations because we do not discuss
   differentiated traffic handling based on different subscriber-
   specific service level agreements and price plans or even actual
   network load conditions.

3.1.  Service chain model for Internet HTTP services

   With the increase of Internet traffic in mobile networks mobile
   operators have started to introduce Performance Enhancement Proxies
   (PEPs) to optimize network resource utilization.  PEPs are more or
   less integrated platforms that ensure the best possible Quality of
   Experience (QoE).  Their service functions include but are not
   limited to Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), web and video optimizations,



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   subscriber and service policy controlled dynamic network adaption,
   analytics and management support.

   A simple service function chain model for mobile Internet upstream
   and downstream traffic is shown in Figure 6 below.  The function
   chain includes Load Balancers (LB), which split HTTP over TCP port 80
   away from the rest of the internet traffic.  Beside basic web
   content, this traffic class includes more and more video.  To act on
   this traffic type we force this traffic to pass Performance
   Enhancement Proxies.  The firewall function (FW) protects the carrier
   network from the outside and Network Address Translation (NAT) maps
   the private IP address space dedicated to user equipment to a public
   IP address.

                          [Cache]
                             |
   [P-GW]---[LB]-----------[PEP]--[LB]--[FW]---[NAT]---[Internet]
             |    HTTP:80          |
             |                     |
             |                     |
             |    non HTTP:80      |
             +---------------------+

    Figure 6: Service function chain for HTTP traffic over TCP port 80.

   The first application in the service chain caches web content to help
   reduce Round Trip Times (RTT) and therefore contribute to improved
   web page load times.  This is generally more important for mobile
   service providers than reducing Internet peering costs.  Similar
   arguments hold for cached video content.  We avoid potential large
   jitter imported from the Internet.

   An example for non HTTP:80 traffic in Figure 6 is UDP-encapsulated
   IPsec traffic, which is dedicated to port 10000.  Note that in a real
   environment not only port 80 but for example additional traffic via
   port 8080, 25 for SMTP, 110 for POP3 or 143 for IMAP may be forced to
   pass a service chain.

   A second application is video optimization.  Video content from the
   Internet may not fit in the size of mobile device displays or simply
   would overload the mobile network when used natively.  Therefore
   mobile operators adapt internet-based video content to ensure the
   best Quality of Experience.

   Video content optimization very often is also an additional premium-
   related component in service offers and price plans.





Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   Our PEP environment for video optimization consists of three basic
   service functions shown in Figure 7: a steering proxy which is able
   to redirect HTTP traffic, a DPI-based controller which checks for
   video content and an optimizer which transcodes videos to an
   appropriate format on the fly in real time.

   [PEP for video] ==>> [Steering Proxy]---[DPI Contr.]---[Optimizer]

       Figure 7: Service functions required for video optimization.










































Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   In Figure 8 we show the detailed HTTP flows and their redirection in
   some more detail.  The intention here is to show every elementary
   functional step in a chain as a separate physical or virtualized
   item, but this state diagram must not necessarily reflect every
   existing vendor-specific proprietary implementation.

   [UE]----[Steering Proxy]----[DPI Contr.]----[Optimizer]----[Content]

     |-- HTTP GET ->|-------------- HTTP GET ----------------------->|

                    |<------------- HTTP Response -------------------|

                    |-- Is it Video? ->|

                    |<-- Video found --|

     |<--- HTTP ----|
         Redirect

     |-- HTTP GET ->|-----HTTP GET ---------------->|

                                                    |-- HTTP GET -->|
                                                          Video

                                                    |<--- HTTP -----|
                                                         Response
                                                        Orig. Video

                                               {Optimize}

                    |<------- HTTP Response --------|
                             Transcoded Video

                    |-- Is it Video? ->|

                    |<-- Video found --|

     |<--- HTTP ----|
         Response
     Transcoded Video

       Figure 8: Flow diagram between UE and video optimization PEP.

   In such an application scenario one can have reclassification or off-
   loading on the fly.

   Assume a video streams within a 4G LTE radio cell.  The video
   optimizer would then apply a transcoding scheme appropriate to the



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   abilities of the 4G network.  If one is now leaving the 4G cell and
   entering a 3G radio cell, the network conditions will most probably
   become different and the video optimizer has to use another
   transcoding scheme to keep a certain QoE.  This requires that the
   video optimizer service function is aware of the Radio Access
   Technology (RAT) in use.  One may transfer RAT type from the P-GW (or
   GGSN in case of 3G traffic) via an AAA Proxy to the service function
   chain.  The RAT information will then be embedded in an appropriate
   Radius message.  Other 3GPP steering mechanisms may apply as well.

   If for example the 4G network has sufficient bandwidth, one could
   also think of another, different use case.  The rule could be that
   only 3G video streams are forced to pass the video optimizer while
   all 4G video traffic will be bypassed.

   Additionally, network utilization information can be used to trigger
   the behavior of the service function.  The degree of video
   compression applied could depend on the actual current network load.

   Last not least the behavior of the video optimizer service function
   (or any other service function) could additionally depend on the
   user-specific service contract (price plan, gold, silver, bronze) or
   on individual on demand requests.

3.1.1.  Weaknesses of current approaches

   This use case model highlights the weakness of current service
   deployments in the areas of traffic selection, reclassification, and
   multi-vendor support.  Traffic in this example is classified after
   the P-GW and separated into separate flows based on whether it is (in
   this example) TCP traffic destined to port 80.  This classification
   could be done by the load balancer if it initiates the service chain
   selection, or the traffic can be reclassified at the load balancer if
   it the traffic already embedded in a service chain (e.g., when
   combined with other functions such as the TCP optimization in the
   following use case).  Multi-vendor support is needed because every
   element in the use case can be provided by a different vendor: load-
   balancer, http proxy, firewall, and NAT.

3.2.  Service chain for TCP optimization

   The essential parameters influencing TCP behavior are latency, packet
   loss and available throughput.

   Content servers are mostly attached to fixed networks.  These are
   characterized by high bandwidth and low latency.  Therefore content
   servers often experience large TCP window sizes.  In fixed networks,




Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 15]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   end-to-end TCP window size mismatches do not have that much negative
   impact on data flows.

   On the other hand, mobile networks show a different behavior.  While
   the (S)Gi-side of the network typically exhibits low latency, low
   packet loss, high bandwidth and minimal congestion, the Radio Access
   Network (RAN) tends to have higher latency, packet loss, and
   congestion.  Therefore mobile devices normally experience much
   smaller TCP window sizes.

   One way to mitigate these different environments, i.e., the LAN and
   the mobile wireless part, is to use split TCP.  However, this leads
   to the case that the mobile wireless part can experience a different
   TCP window size than the fixed LAN part.

   In mobile networks, these TCP window size mismatches may result in
   poor end-to-end throughput and bad user experience.

   Therefore mobile operators very often use TCP optimization proxies in
   the data path.  These proxies monitor latency and throughput real-
   time and dynamically optimize TCP parameters for each TCP connection
   to ensure a better transmission behavior.

   A rudimentary service chain setup for TCP optimization is shown in
   Figure 9.  Examples of non TCP flows are UDP/RTP voice or video
   traffic.

   [P-GW]---[LB]----------[TCP Opt.]---[LB]---[FW]---[NAT]---[Internet]
              |     TCP                  |
              |                          |
              |     non-TCP              |
              +--------------------------+

      Figure 9: Optimizing TCP parameterization in a mobile network.

3.2.1.  Weaknesses of current approaches

   This use case highlights weaknesses of current service deployments in
   the areas of traffic selection, reclassification, and multi-vendor
   support as in the previous use case presented in Section 3.1.

3.3.  HTTP header enrichment in mobile networks

   In legacy mobile networks WAP (Wireless Application Protocol)
   gateways mediated between traditional mobile phones and the Internet
   translating HTML web content into a WML (Wireless Markup Language)
   and vice versa.  By functionality, WAP-GWs fit also in the SFC
   category.



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 16]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   Traditionally WAP-GWs use HTTP header enrichment to insert subscriber
   related datainto WAP and HTTP request headers in real time.  These
   data were (are) used to identify and charge subscribers on third
   party web sites.

   Of today 3G and 4G mobile networks HTTP header enrichment is done by
   the GGSN/P-GW or a dedicated transparent HTTP optimizer as most of
   the data traffic on a mobile network no longer passes a WAP-GW.

   Information typically added to the header includes:

   o  Charging Characteristics

   o  Charging ID

   o  Subscriber ID

   o  GGSN or PGW IP address

   o  Serving Gateway Support Node (SGSN) or SGW IP address

   o  International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI)

   o  International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI)

   o  Mobile Subscriber ISDN Number (MSISDN)

   o  UE IP address

4.  Remarks on QoS in mobile networks

   As indicated in Figure 3, service functions may be linked to the
   control plane to take care of additional subscriber or service
   related metadata.  In many cases the source of metadata would be the
   PCRF and the link would be a Gx or Diameter-based Sd interface.
   Diameter is specified in [RFC6733] and Gx in [3GPP].

   Service functions within the SGi/Gi-LAN are less focused on the
   explicit QoS steering of the actual mobile wireless network.  QoS in
   mobile networks is based on the 3GPP "Bearer" concept.  A Bearer is
   the essential traffic separation element enabling traffic separation
   according different QoS settings and represents the logical
   transmission path between the User Equipment (UE) and the Packet
   Gateway (P-GW).







Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 17]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


5.  Weaknesses of current implementations

   In many operator environments every new service introduction can
   result in a further dedicated (S)Gi-LAN service chain, because
   service chaining has been deployed historically in an ad hoc manner.
   It typically requires placement of new functions in the operator's
   data center, changing the actual wiring to include any new or change
   service function, configuration of the functions and network
   equipment, and finally testing of the new configuration to ensure
   that everything has been properly setup.

5.1.  Granularity of the classification scheme

   Often the coarse grained classification according to APNs is not fine
   enough to uniquely select a service function chain or a processing
   scheme within a service function chain required to support the
   typical user-, service- or network- related policies which the
   operator likes to apply to a specific user plane flow.

   It is very likely that an APN, such as shown in Section 2.3, is
   carrying an extremely diverse set of user traffic.  This can range
   from HTTP web traffic to real-time traffic.

5.2.  Service chain implementations

   In many carrier networks service chain LANs grow incrementally
   according product introductions or product modifications.  This very
   often ends in a mix of static IP links, policy based routing or
   individual VRF implementations etc. to enforce the required sequence
   of service functions.  Major weak points seen in many carrier
   networks are:

   o  Very static service chain instances, hard-wired on the network
      layer leads to no flexibility with respect to reusing, adding, and
      removing service nodes and reprogramming service chains.

   o  Evolutionary grown "handcrafted" connectivity models require high
      complexity to manage or maintain.

   o  Basic implementation paradigm is based on APNs (that is service
      types) only, which requires individual injections of context-
      related metadata to obtain granularity down to user/service level.

   o  There is currently no natural (or standardized) information
      exchange on network status between services and the network,
      complicating management of network resources based on subscriber
      profiles.




Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 18]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   o  It is currently practically impossible to implement an automated
      service provisioning and delivery platform.

   o  Scaling up flows or service chains with service or subscriber
      related metadata is extremely diffculty.

6.  Operator requirements

   Mobile operators use service function chains to enable and optimize
   service delivery, offer network related customer services, optimize
   network behavior or protect networks against attacks and ensure
   privacy.  Service function chains are essential to their business.
   Without these, mobile operators are not able to deliver the necessary
   and contracted Quality of Experience or even certain products to
   their customers.

6.1.  Simplicity of service function chain instantiation

   Because product development cycles are very fast in mobile markets,
   mobile operators are asking for service chaining environments which
   allow them to instantly create or modify service chains in a very
   flexible and very simple way.  The creation of service chains should
   be embedded in the business and operation support layers of the
   company and on an abstract functional level, independent of any
   network underlay.  No knowledge about internetworking technology
   should be required at all.  The mapping of the functional model of a
   service chain onto the actual underlay network should be done by a
   provisioning software package similar to that shown in Figure 10.
   Details of the architecture and design are the subject of forthcoming
   standards and proprietary implementation details.





















Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 19]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   +------------------------------------------------------------------+
   |         Creation of an abstract service function chain           |
   +------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                       |
                                       V
   +------------------------------------------------------------------+
   |       +----------------------------------------------------+     |
   |       |           Service function chain compiler          |     |
   |       +----------------------------------------------------+     |
   |                                   |                              |
   |                                   V                              |
   |       +----------------------------------------------------+     |
   |       |                     Mediation device               |     |
   |       +----------------------------------------------------+     |
   +------------------------------------------------------------------+
                                       |
                                       V
   +------------------------------------------------------------------+
   |                        Physical network underlay                 |
   +------------------------------------------------------------------+

     Figure 10: Creation and provisioning system for service function
                                  chains.

   Service functions can be physical or virtualized.  In the near future
   the majority of mobile service functions will typically reside in the
   local cloud computing environment of a mobile core location.
   Nevertheless, the architecture and design should allow and support
   also remote service functions if applicable.

6.2.  Extensions

   A service function chain should be generalized by a directed graph
   where the vertices (nodes) represent an elementary service function.
   This model allows branching conditions at the vertices.  Branching in
   a graph could then be triggered by typical 3GPP specified mobile
   metadata (see Section 2.3) and allow for more sophisticated steering
   methods in a service chain.  Typically this data will be injected by
   the mobile control plane, commonly by the PCRF via a Diameter-based
   3GPP Sd interface.

   Service chain behavior and output should additionally depend on
   actual network conditions.  For example, the selection of a video
   compression format could depend on the actual load of the mobile
   network segment a mobile user is attached to.  That is to say that
   classification of flows may allow very dynamic inputs while
   specification of such inputs from a 3GPP network will need to be done
   by 3GPP or another standards body.



Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 20]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   Although necessary metadata can be obtained from the PCRF, to avoid
   Diameter signaling storms in the (S)Gi-LAN, individual service
   functions should probably not be attached individually to the control
   plane.  A mechanism where such metadata is carried by a metadata
   header can reduce requests to the PCRF, provided these extensions do
   not increase the original payload size too much.

6.3.  Delimitations

   A clear separation between service chaining functionality and 3GPP
   bearer handling is required.  This may be subject of forthcoming
   studies.

7.  Security Considerations

   TBD.

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no actions for IANA.

9.  Acknowledgments

   We thank Peter Bosch, Carlos Correia, Dave Dolson, Linda Dunbar, Alla
   Goldner, Wim Hendericks, Konstantin Livanos, Praveen Muley, Ron
   Parker, and Nirav Salot for valuable discussions and contributions.

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

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

10.2.  Informative References

   [RFC6459]  Korhonen, J., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, T.,
              Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation
              Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)",
              RFC 6459, January 2012.

   [RFC6733]  Fajardo, V., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn,
              "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 6733, October 2012.

   [TS.23.003]
              "Numbering, addressing and identification", 3GPP TS 23.003
              12.1.0, December 2013.




Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 21]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   [TS.23.203]
              "Policy and charging control architecture", 3GPP TS 23.203
              12.3.0, December 2013.

   [TS.23.401]
              "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements for
              Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network
              (E-UTRAN) access", 3GPP TS 23.401 12.3.0, December 2013.

   [TS.29.061]
              "Interworking between the Public Land Mobile Network
              (PLMN) supporting packet based services and Packet Data
              Networks (PDN)", 3GPP TS 29.061 12.4.0, December 2013.

   [TS.29.274]
              "3GPP Evolved Packet System (EPS); Evolved General Packet
              Radio Service (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol for Control plane
              (GTPv2-C); Stage 3", 3GPP TS 29.274 12.3.0, December 2013.

   [TS.29.281]
              "General Packet Radio System (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol
              User Plane (GTPv1-U)", 3GPP TS 29.281 11.6.0, March 2013.

Authors' Addresses

   Walter Haeffner
   Vodafone
   Vodafone D2 GmbH
   Ferdinand-Braun-Platz 1
   Duesseldorf  40549
   DE

   Phone: +49 (0)172 663 7184
   Email: walter.haeffner@vodafone.com


   Jeffrey Napper
   Cisco Systems
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Haarlerbergweg 13-19
   Amsterdam  1101 CH
   NL

   Email: jenapper@cisco.com







Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 22]


Internet-Draft          SFC Use Cases in Mobility               May 2014


   Martin Stiemerling
   NEC
   NEC Europe Ltd.
   Kurfuersten-Anlage 36
   Heidelberg  69181
   DE

   Email: mls.ietf@gmail.com


   Diego R. Lopez
   Telefonica I+D
   Don Ramon de la Cruz, 82
   Madrid  28006
   ES

   Phone: +34 913 129 041
   Email: diego@tid.es


   Jim Uttaro
   AT&T
   200 South Laurel Ave
   Middletown, NJ  07748
   US

   Email: uttaro@att.com
























Haeffner, et al.        Expires November 6, 2014               [Page 23]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.126, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/