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

Versions: 00 01 02

v6ops                                                             C. Xie
Internet-Draft                                                     C. Li
Intended status: Informational            China Telecom Beijing Research
Expires: December 30, 2017                                     Institute
                                                                  C. Bao
                                                                  G. Han
                                                                   X. Li
                                                  CERNET Center/Tsinghua
                                                              University
                                                           June 28, 2017


                      MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom
               draft-xcf-v6ops-chinatelecom-deployment-02

Abstract

   With the depletion of the IPv4 address space, large-scale SPs are now
   faced with the real option to deploy IPv6 in a timely manner.  In
   order to achieve smooth transition to IPv6, migration tools should be
   introduced for different deployment models.  Among different IPv6
   transition mechanisms, MAP-T is a stateless translation method which
   can directly translate IPv4 packet to IPv6 packet.  This document
   describes the challenges and requirements for large SP to deploy IPv6
   in operational network, the experimental results of MAP-T in our
   laboratory and the field trials in large SP operational network.

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 December 30, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.



Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


   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.  Major Motivation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     1.2.  IPv4-as-a-Service Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Architecture and Methodology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     2.1.  Major Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     2.2.  Regulatory Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     2.3.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     2.4.  Operational Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     2.5.  End-User Experience Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   3.  Design and Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     3.1.  Lab Test  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     3.2.  Field Trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   4.  Observations and Experiences  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
     4.1.  Effects on End-User . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
     4.2.  Effects on Internal Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
     4.3.  Effects on Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   5.  Summary: Post-mortem Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     5.1.  Deviations from IETF Documents  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8















Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


1.  Introduction

   The dramatic growth of the Internet is accelerating the exhaustion of
   available IPv4 addressing pool.  It is widely accepted that IPv6 is
   the only real option on the table for the continued growth of the
   Internet.  However, IPv6 deployment is a huge systematic project and
   a lot of challenges will arise especially in large SP operational
   network.

1.1.  Major Motivation

   In order to achieve smooth transition to IPv6, migration tools should
   be introduced for different deployment models, among which MAP-T
   [RFC7599] is a stateless translation mechanism with good scalability.
   This document describes the challenges and requirements for large SPs
   in IPv6 transition period.  Then, we introduce MAP-T experimental
   results in our laboratory and the field trials in large SP
   operational network.

1.2.  IPv4-as-a-Service Requirements

   In order to facilitate smooth IPv6 migration, some factors need to be
   taken into consideration especially for large SPs.  There are ten
   major requirements:

   1.   It should deploy in an incremental fashion and the overall
        transition process should be stable and operational.

   2.   It should largely reduce IPv4 public address consumption.

   3.   It should accelerate the deployment of IPv6, rather than just
        prolonging the lifecycle of IPv4 by introducing multiple layers
        of NAT.

   4.   There should be no perceived degradation of customer experience.
        As a result, IPv6 transition mechanisms should provide IPv4
        service continuity.

   5.   It should achieve scalability, simplicity and high availability,
        especially for large-scale SPs.

   6.   It should have user management and network management ability.

   7.   It should support user authentication, authorization and
        accounting as an essential part of operational network.

   8.   Most SPs need some kind of mechanisms to trace the origin of
        traffic in their networks.  This should also be available for



Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


        IPv6 traffic.

   9.   It should have good throughput performance and massive
        concurrent session support.

   10.  It should maintain the deployment concepts and business models
        which have been proven and used with existing revenue generating
        IPv4 services.

2.  Architecture and Methodology

2.1.  Major Design Considerations

   The major objective listed in the following is to verify the
   functionality and performance of MAP-T:

   o  Verify how to deploy MAP-T in practical network.

   o  Verify what applications can be used in MAP-T.

   o  Verify what Operating Systems can be supported in MAP-T.

   o  Verify the effect of user experience with limited ports.

   o  Verify the performance of MAP-T.

2.2.  Regulatory Considerations

   The government requires server operators to detect the packet sender
   by source IP (and port) and therefore stateless address mapping
   technologies are preferred.  This will dramatically reduce the volume
   of material required to be held for logging compliance.

   In addition, the stateless translation technology is preferred, since
   IPv6 addresses in the IPv6 packets everywhere in the network contain
   both the IPv6 and IPv4 address information without the requirement of
   decapsulation.

2.3.  Security Considerations

   From operation point of view, single stack (IPv6-only) is easier for
   ensuring the security compared with the dual stack.

   The stateless mechanism can help for the trace-back and identifying
   the source addresses (and port).

   The translation mechanism can help for configuring the access list
   and rate-limiting control without decapsulation.



Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


2.4.  Operational Considerations

   The MAP-T deployment should support the DHCPv6-PD and MAP-T parameter
   auto-configuration [RFC7598], the PPPoE authentication and source
   address tracing back.

2.5.  End-User Experience Considerations

   The major issues are:

   o  Application test: The applications we have tested include web,
      email, Instant Message, ftp, telnet, SSH, video, Video Camera,
      P2P, online game, Voip, VPN and so on.

   o  Operating System test: The OS we have tested includes Win7/8, OSX,
      windows XP, iOS, Android, and Linux.

   o  Performance test: We have measured the parameters of concurrent
      session number, throughput performance.

3.  Design and Deployment

3.1.  Lab Test

   The lab test topology is Figure 1

     +-----+  +-----+
     |Host1+--+ CE1 +------+                              ------
     +-----+  +-----+      |                          ////      \\\\
                         /-+--\      +----------+   //              \\
                       //      \\    |          |  |                  |
     +-----+  +-----+ |  IPv6    |   | MAP-T BR |  |  IPv4 Internet   |
     |Host2+--+ CE2 +-+ Network  +---|          +--+                  |
     +-----+  +-----+  \\      //    |          |   \\              //
                         |---+/      +----------+     \\\\      ////
                         |   |                            ------
     +-----+  +-----+    |   |
     |Host3+--+ CE3 +----+   |
     +-----+  +-----+        |                            ------
                             |                        ////      \\\\\
                             |                      |/                |
                             +----------------------+  IPv6 Internet  |
                                                    |                 |
        CEs are connted to the                      |\               /
        IPv6 Network via BRAS                         \\\\      /////
        (PPPoE and DHCPv6)                                ------

                         Figure 1: MAP-T Lab Test



Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


3.2.  Field Trial

   The deployment model of MAP-T in operational network is depicted in
   Figure 2

       ----             -----
     //    \\         //     \\         ---------              --------
    /        \       /         \      //         \\         //  CPN
   |         +-----+            +----+             \       /   --------
   |         |     |   Metro    |BRAS|              |-----|--End System
   | Backbone|Core |   Area     |/SR |   Access     |     |    --------
   | Network |Route|  Network   +----+   Network    | CPE |    --------
   |         |     |            |AAA |              |-----|--End System
   |         +-----+            +----+             /    |  \   --------
    \        /       \          /      \\         //    |   \\
     \\    //         \\      //         --------       |     ---------
       ----            ----|--                          |
                           |                            |
    -----------------|     |      |----------------|    |    |---------|
                      \    |     /                  \   |   /          |
                       \---|--- /                    \--|--/           |
        IPv6/IPv4      | MAP-T  |       IPv6-only    |MAP-T| IPv6/IPv4 |
         Internet      |   BR   |        Network     |  CE |  Network  |
                      / ------- \                   / ----- \          |
                     /           \                 /         \         |
    ----------------|             |----------------|          |--------|

                        Figure 2: MAP-T Field Trial

4.  Observations and Experiences

4.1.  Effects on End-User

   o  MAP-T can support all IPv4 applications, sam as NAT44.

   o  MAP-T can support a variety of Operating Systems.

   o  With the ratio of 128 (512 maximum concurrent sessions), there is
      no perceived degradation of customer experience.

4.2.  Effects on Internal Staff

   o  MAP-T can have good scalability.  MAP-T BR does not need to
      maintain any session state, and only limited session states have
      to been maintained in CE for its customer.

   o  MAP-T can be deployed in an incremental way.




Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


   o  MAP-T supports DHCPv6-PD and PPPoE user authentication and the
      function of the source address trace back.

4.3.  Effects on Business

   MAP-T can help to promote IPv6 business and to use public IPv4
   address more effectively..

5.  Summary: Post-mortem Report

   MAP-T is a useful tool for IPv6 transition for large scale SPs.

5.1.  Deviations from IETF Documents

   The IETF RFCs for the testing and field trial are [RFC7597],
   [RFC7599], [RFC7598] and [I-D.ietf-softwire-map-deployment]

6.  IANA Considerations

   This specification does not require any IANA actions.

7.  Security Considerations

   There are no other special security considerations.

8.  Acknowledgements

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC7597]                           Troan, O., Ed., Dec, W., Li, X.,
                                       Bao, C., Matsushima, S.,
                                       Murakami, T., and T. Taylor, Ed.,
                                       "Mapping of Address and Port with
                                       Encapsulation (MAP-E)", RFC 7597,
                                       DOI 10.17487/RFC7597, July 2015,
                                       <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/
                                       rfc7597>.

   [RFC7598]                           Mrugalski, T., Troan, O., Farrer,
                                       I., Perreault, S., Dec, W., Bao,
                                       C., Yeh, L., and X. Deng, "DHCPv6
                                       Options for Configuration of
                                       Softwire Address and Port-Mapped
                                       Clients", RFC 7598, DOI 10.17487/
                                       RFC7598, July 2015, <http://
                                       www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7598>.



Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


   [RFC7599]                           Li, X., Bao, C., Dec, W., Ed.,
                                       Troan, O., Matsushima, S., and T.
                                       Murakami, "Mapping of Address and
                                       Port using Translation (MAP-T)",
                                       RFC 7599, DOI 10.17487/RFC7599,
                                       July 2015, <http://
                                       www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7599>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-softwire-map-deployment]  Qiong, Q., Chen, M., Chen, G.,
                                       Tsou, T., and S. Perreault,
                                       "Mapping of Address and Port
                                       (MAP) - Deployment
                                       Considerations", draft-ietf-
                                       softwire-map-deployment-06 (work
                                       in progress), June 2015.

Authors' Addresses

   Chongfeng Xie
   China Telecom Beijing Research Institute
   Room 708 No.118, Xizhimenneidajie, xicheng District
   Beijing,   100035
   China

   Phone: +86-10-58552116
   EMail: xiechf@ctbri.com.cn


   Chen Li
   China Telecom Beijing Research Institute
   Room 708 No.118, Xizhimenneidajie, xicheng District
   Beijing,   100035
   China

   Phone: +86-10-58552116
   EMail: lichen@ctbri.com.cn













Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft         MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom             June 2017


   Congxiao Bao
   CERNET Center/Tsinghua University
   Room 225, Main Building, Tsinghua University
   Beijing,   100084
   China

   Phone: +86 10-62785983
   EMail: congxiao@cernet.edu.cn


   Guoliang Han
   CERNET Center/Tsinghua University
   Room 225, Main Building, Tsinghua University
   Beijing  100084
   CN

   Phone: +86 10-62785983
   EMail: bupthgl@gmail.com


   Xing Li
   CERNET Center/Tsinghua University
   Room 225, Main Building, Tsinghua University
   Beijing,   100084
   China

   Phone: +86 10-62785983
   EMail: xing@cernet.edu.cn























Xie, et al.             Expires December 30, 2017               [Page 9]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/