wdiff draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-01.txt draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-02.txt

V6OPS Working Group D. Binet
Internet-Draft M. Boucadair
Intended status: Informational France Telecom
Expires: September October 28, 2013 A. Vizdal
Deutsche Telekom AG
C. Byrne
T-Mobile
G. Chen
China Mobile
March 27,
April 26, 2013

Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices
draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-01
draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-02

Abstract

This document specifies an IPv6 profile for 3GPP mobile devices. It
lists the set of features a 3GPP mobile device is to be compliant
with to connect to an IPv6-only or dual-stack mobile network. wireless network
(including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE 802.11 network).

This document defines a different profile than the one for general
connection to IPv6 mobile cellular networks defined in [RFC3316].
[I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis]. In particular, this document identifies
also features to ensure deliver IPv4 connectivity service continuity over an IPv6-only
transport.

Both Hosts hosts and devices with LAN capabilities capability to share their WAN (Wide Area
Network) connectivity are in scope.

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 September October 28, 2013.

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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Special Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Connectivity Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5
2.1. WiFi WLAN Connectivity . . . . . . . Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3. Advanced Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Cellular Devices with LAN Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. APIs & Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 12
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 13
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 13
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 13
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 17

1. Introduction

IPv6 deployment in 3GPP mobile networks is the only perennial
solution to the exhaustion of IPv4 addresses in those networks.
Several mobile operators have already deployed IPv6 or are in the
pre-deployment phase. One of the major hurdles encountered by mobile
operators is the availability of non-broken IPv6 implementation in
mobile devices.
Some vendors are already proposing some mobile devices with a set of
IPv6 features, but the majority of devices are still lacking IPv6
support.

[RFC3316]

[I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis] lists a set of features to be supported
by cellular hosts to connect to 3GPP cellular mobile networks. Since the publication of that
document, new functions have been specified within the 3GPP and the
IETF whilst others have been updated. Moreover, in In the light
of recent IPv6 production deployments, additional features to
facilitate IPv6-only deployments while accessing IPv4-only service
are to be considered.

This document defines a different profile than the one for general
connection to IPv6 mobile networks defined in [RFC3316];
[I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis]; in particular:

o It lists an extended list of required features while
[I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis] identifies issues and explains how to
implement basic IPv6 features in a mobile cellular context.

o It identifies also features to ensure IPv4 service continuity delivery over
an IPv6-only transport.

This document specifies an IPv6 profile for mobile devices listing
required specifications produced by various SDOs Standards Developing
Organizations (in particular 3GPP and IETF). The objectives of this
effort are:

1. List in one single document all requirements a mobile device is
to comply with to connect to an IPv6 or dual stack dual-stack mobile
network. These requirements cover various network types such as
GPRS,
GPRS (General Packet Radio Service), EPC (Evolved Packet Core) or Wi-Fi
IEEE 802.11 network.

2. Help Operators with the detailed device requirement list
preparation (to be exchanged with device suppliers). This is
also a contribution to harmonize Operators' requirements towards
device vendors.

3. Vendors to be aware of a minimal set of requirements to allow for
IPv6 connectivity and IPv4 service continuity (over an IPv6- only IPv6-only
transport).

Pointers to some requirements listed in [RFC6434] are included in
this profile. The justification for using a stronger language
compared to what is specified in [RFC6434] is provided for some
requirements.

The requirements do not include 3GPP release details. For more
information on the 3GPP releases detail, the reader may refer to
Section 6.2 of [RFC6459].

Some of the features listed in this profile document require to
activate dedicated functions at the network side. It is out of scope
of this document to list these network-side functions.

A detailed overview of IPv6 support in 3GPP architectures is provided
in [RFC6459].

This document makes use of the terms defined in [RFC6459]. In
addition, the following terms are used:

o "3GPP cellular host" (or cellular host for short) denotes a 3GPP
device which can be connected to 3GPP mobile networks or IEEE
802.11 networks.

o "3GPP cellular device" (or cellular device for short) refers to a
cellular host which supports the capability to share its WAN (Wide
Area Network) connectivity.

o "Cellular host" and "mobile host" are used interchangeably.

o "Cellular device" and "mobile device" are used interchangeably.

PREFIX64 denotes an IPv6 prefix used to build IPv4-converted IPv6
addresses [RFC6052].

1.1. Scope

Various types of nodes can be connected to 3GPP networks requiring
specific functions. Indeed, a

A 3GPP mobile network can be used to connect various user equipment equipments
such as a mobile telephone, a CPE (Customer Premises Equipment) or a machine-to-
machine (M2M)
M2M (machine-to-machine) device. Because of this diversity of
terminals, it is necessary to define a set of IPv6 functionalities
valid for any node directly connecting to a 3GPP mobile network.
This document describes these functionalities.

This document is structured to initially provide the generic IPv6 requirements
which are valid for all nodes, whatever their function or service
(e.g., SIP [RFC3261]) capability. The document also contains,
dedicated sections covering specific functionalities the specific
device types must support (e.g., smartphones, devices providing some
LAN functions (mobile CPE or broadband dongles)).

M2M devices profile is out of scope.

The requirements listed below are valid for both 3GPP GPRS and 3GPP
EPS (Evolved Packet System) access. For EPS, "PDN type" terminology PDN-Connection term is
used instead of "PDP
context". PDP-Context.

This document identifies also some WLAN-related IPv6 requirements.
Other non-3GPP accesses [TS.23402] are out of scope of this document.

1.2. Special 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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

This document is not a standard. It uses the normative keywords only
for precision.

2. Connectivity Requirements

REQ#1: The cellular host MUST be compliant with Section 5.9.1 (IPv6
Addressing Architecture) and Section 5.8 (ICMPv6 support) of
[RFC6434].

REQ#2: The cellular host MUST support both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP PDP-
Contexts.

This allows each operator to select their own strategy
regarding IPv6 introduction. Both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP
contexts PDP-
Contexts MUST be supported in addition to the IPv4 PDP
context. supported. IPv4, IPv6 or IPv4v6 PDP-Context
request acceptance depends on the mobile cellular network
configuration.

REQ#3: The cellular host MUST comply with the behavior defined in
[TS.23060] [TS.23401] [TS.24008] for requesting a PDP context PDP-Context
type. In particular, the cellular host MUST request by default
an IPv6 PDP
context PDP-Context if the cellular host is IPv6-only and
requesting an IPv4v6 PDP context PDP-Context if the cellular host is dual dual-
stack or when the cellular host is not aware of connectivity
types requested by devices connected to it (e.g., cellular host
with LAN
capabilities): capabilities as discussed in Section 4):

* If the requested IPv4v6 PDP context PDP-Context is not supported by the
network, but IPv4 and IPv6 PDP types are allowed, then the
cellular host will be configured with an IPv4 address and/or or an
IPv6 prefix by the network. It MAY MUST initiate another PDP
request PDP-
Context activation in addition to the one already activated
for a given
APN. APN (Access Point Name).

* If the requested PDP type and subscription data allows only
one IP address family (IPv4 or IPv6), the cellular host MUST
NOT request a second PDP context PDP-Context to the same APN for the
other IP address family.

The text above focuses on the specification part which explains
the behavior for requesting IPv6-related PDP context(s). PDP-Context(s).
Understanding this behavior is important to avoid having broken
IPv6 implementations in cellular devices.

REQ#4: The cellular host MUST support the PCO (Protocol
Configuration Options) [TS.24008] to retrieve the IPv6
address(es) of the Recursive DNS server(s).

In-band signaling is a convenient method to inform the
cellular host about various services, including DNS server
information. It does not require any specific protocol to be
supported and it is already deployed in IPv4 cellular
networks to convey such DNS information.

REQ#5: The cellular host MUST support IPv6 aware Traffic Flow
Templates (TFT) [TS.24008].

Traffic Flow Templates are employing a Packet Filter packet filter to
couple an IP traffic with a PDP-Context. Thus a dedicated
PDP-Context and radio resources can be provided by the mobile
cellular network for certain IP traffic.

REQ#6: The device MUST support the Neighbor Discovery Protocol
([RFC4861] and [RFC5942]).

This is a stronger form compared to what is specified in
Section 5.2 and Section 12.2 of [RFC6434].

The support of Neighbor Discovery Protocol is mandatory in mobile
3GPP cellular environment as it is the only way to convey
IPv6 prefix towards the mobile 3GPP cellular device.

In particular, MTU (Maximum Transmission Unit) communication
via Router Advertisement
SHOULD MUST be supported since many 3GPP
networks do not have a standard MTU setting due setting.

REQ#7: The cellular host MUST comply with Section 5.6.1 of
[RFC6434]. If the MTU used by cellular hosts is larger than
1280 bytes, they can rely on Path MTU discovery function to inconsistencies in GTP [RFC3314]
mobility tunnel infrastructure deployments.
discover the real path MTU.

REQ#8: The cellular host MUST support IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration ([RFC4862]) apart from the exceptions noted in
[TS.23060] (3G) and [TS.23401] (LTE):

Stateless mode is the only way to configure a cellular host.
The GGSN must allocate a prefix that is unique within its
scope to each primary PDP context.

The PDP-Context.

To configure its link local address, the cellular host MUST
use the interface identifier sent Interface Identifier conveyed in
PDP Context Accept message to configure its link local
address. 3GPP PDP-Context
setup signaling received from a GGSN/PGW. The cellular host
may use a different Interface Identifiers to configure its
global addresses. addresses (see also REQ#23 about privacy addressing
requirement).

For more details, refer to [RFC6459] and
[I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis].

REQ#9: The cellular host must MUST comply with Section 7.3 of [RFC6434].

The support of Router Advertisement Options for DNS
configuration allows for a consistent method of informing
cellular hosts about DNS recursive servers across various
types of access networks. The cellular host SHOULD support
RA-based DNS information discovery.

REQ#10: The cellular host must MUST comply with Section 7.2.1 of
[RFC6434].

Stateless DHCPv6 is useful to retrieve other information than
DNS.

If [RFC6106] is not supported, the cellular host SHOULD
retrieve DNS information using stateless DHCPv6 [RFC3736].

REQ#11: If the cellular host receives the DNS information in several
channels for the same interface, the following preference order
MUST be followed:

1. PCP PCO

2. RA

3. DHCPv6

REQ#11:

REQ#12: The cellular host SHOULD support a method to locally
construct IPv4-embedded IPv6 addresses [RFC6052]. A method to
learn PREFIX64 SHOULD be supported by the cellular host.

This solves the issue when applications use IPv4 referrals on
IPv6-only access networks.

In PCP-based environments, cellular hosts SHOULD follow
[I-D.ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64] to learn the IPv6 Prefix used
by an upstream PCP-controlled NAT64 device. If PCP is not
enabled, the cellular host SHOULD implement the method
specified in [I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic] to
retrieve the PREFIX64.

REQ#12:

REQ#13: The cellular host SHOULD implement the Customer Side
Translator (CLAT, [I-D.ietf-v6ops-464xlat]) [RFC6877]) function which is compliant with
[RFC6052][RFC6145][RFC6146].

CLAT function in the cellular host allows for IPv4-only
application and IPv4-referals to work on an IPv6-only PDP.
connectivity. CLAT function requires a NAT64 capability
[RFC6146] in the core network.

REQ#13:

REQ#14: The cellular device SHOULD embed a DNS64 function [RFC6147].

Local DNS64 functionality allows for compatibility with
DNSSEC. DNS
Security Extensions (DNSSEC, [RFC4033], [RFC4034],
[RFC4035]). Means to configure or discover a PREFIX64 is
also required on the cellular device.

REQ#14: device as discussed in REQ#12.

REQ#15: The cellular host SHOULD support PCP [I-D.ietf-pcp-base].

The support of PCP is seen as a driver to save battery
consumption exacerbated by keepalive messages. PCP also
gives the possibility of enabling incoming connections to the
user.
cellular device. Indeed, because several stateful devices
may be deployed in mobile wireless networks (e.g., NAT and/or
Firewalls), PCP can be used by the cellular host to control network based
network-based NAT and Firewall functions which will reduce
per-application signaling and save battery consumption.

REQ#15:

REQ#16: When the cellular host is dual stack connected, dual-stack connected (i.e.,
configured with an IPv4 address and IPv6 prefix), it SHOULD
support means to prefer native IPv6 connection over connection
established through translation devices (e.g., NAT44 and NAT64).

When both IPv4 and IPv6 DNS servers are configured, a dual-
stack host MUST contact first its IPv6 DNS server.

Cellular hosts SHOULD follow the procedure specified in
[RFC6724] for source address selection.

Some potential issues are discussed in
[I-D.ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension] for MIFed devices.

REQ#16:

REQ#17: The cellular host SHOULD support Happy Eyeballs procedure
defined in [RFC6555].

REQ#17: The cellular host SHOULD NOT perform Duplicate Address
Detection (DAD) for these Global IPv6 addresses (as the GGSN or
PDN-GW must not configure any IPv6 addresses using the prefix
allocated to the cellular host). Refer to Section 4 for DAD
considerations on the LAN interface when the 3GPP connection is
shared.

REQ#18: The cellular device MAY embed a BIH function [RFC6535]
facilitating the communication between an IPv4 application and
an IPv6 server.

2.1. WiFi WLAN Connectivity Requirements

It is increasingly common for cellular hosts have a Wi-Fi WLAN interface in
addition to their cellular interface. These hosts are likely to be
connected to private or public hotspots. Below are listed some
generic requirements:

REQ#19: IPv6 MUST be supported on the Wi-Fi WLAN interface. In
particular, IPv6-only connectivity MUST be supported over the
Wi-Fi
WLAN interface.

Recent

Some tests revealed that IPv4 configuration is required to
enable IPv6-only connectivity. Indeed, some cellular
handsets can access a Wi-Fi WLAN IPv6-only network by configuring
first a static IPv4 address. Once the device is connected
to the network and the wlan0 interface got an IPv6 global
address, the IPv4 address can be deleted from the
configuration. This avoids the device to ask automatically
for a DHCPv4 server, and allows to connect to IPv6-only
networks. Failing to configure an IPv4 address on the
interface MUST NOT prohibit using IPv6 on the same
interface.

IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration ([RFC4862]) MUST
be supported.

REQ#20: DHCPv6 client SHOULD be supported on Wi-Fi WLAN interface.

Refer to Section 7.2.1 of [RFC6434].

REQ#21: Wi-Fi WLAN interface SHOULD support Router Advertisement Options
for DNS configuration (See Section Section 7.3 of [RFC6434]).

REQ#22: If the device receives the DNS information in several
channels for the same interface, the following preference
order MUST be followed:

1. RA

2. DHCPv6

3. Advanced Requirements

REQ#22: The cellular host must comply with Section 5.6.1 of
[RFC6434]. If the MTU used by cellular hosts is larger than
1280 bytes, they can rely on Path MTU discovery function to
discover the real path MTU.

REQ#23: The cellular host must comply with Section 5.9.3 of
[RFC6434] for the support of the Privacy Extensions for
Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6. MUST be able to generate IPv6 addresses
which preserve privacy.

The activation of privacy extension (e.g., using [RFC4941])
makes it more difficult to track a host over time when
compared to using a permanent interface identifier. Interface Identifier. Note,
[RFC4941] does not require any DAD mechanism to be
activated as the GGSN (or PDN-GW) GGSN/PGW MUST NOT configure any global
address based on the prefix allocated to the cellular host.

Tracking a host is still possible based on the first 64
bits of the IPv6 address. Means to prevent against such
tracking issues may be enabled in the network side.

REQ#24: The cellular host SHOULD MUST support ROHC RTP Profile (0x0001) and
ROHC UDP Profile (0x0002) for IPv6 ([RFC5795]). Other ROHC
profiles MAY be supported.

Bandwidth in mobile environments cellular networks must be optimized as much as
possible. ROHC provides a solution to reduce bandwidth
consumption and to reduce reduce the impact of having bigger
packet headers in IPv6 compared to IPv4.

"RTP/UDP/IP" ROHC profile (0x0001) to compress RTP packets
and "UDP/IP" ROHC profile (0x0002) to compress RTCP packets
are required for Voice over LTE (VoLTE) by IR.92.4.0
section 4.1 [IR92]. Note, [IR92] indicates also the host
must be able to apply the impact of having bigger
packet headers in IPv6 compared compression to IPv4. packets that are
carried over the radio bearer dedicated for the voice
media.

REQ#25: The cellular host SHOULD support IPv6 Router Advertisement
Flags Options ([RFC5175]).

This is a stronger form compared to what is specified in
[RFC6434]. The justification is some flags are used by the
GGSN (or PDN-GW) to inform cellular hosts about the
autoconfiguration process.

REQ#26: The cellular host must MUST comply with Section 5.3 of [RFC6434]
and SHOULD support Router Advertisement extension for
communicating default router preferences and more-specific
routes as described in [RFC4191].

This function can be used for instance for traffic offload.

4. Cellular Devices with LAN Capabilities

This section focuses on cellular devices (e.g., CPE, smartphones or
dongles with tethering features) which provide IP connectivity to
other devices connected to them. In such case, all connected devices
are sharing the same GPRS, UMTS 2G, 3G or EPS LTE connection. In addition to the
generic requirements listed in Section 2, these cellular devices have
to meet the requirements listed below.

REQ#27: The cellular device MUST support Prefix Delegation
capabilities [RFC3633] and MUST support Prefix Exclude Option
for DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation as defined in [RFC6603].
Particularly, it MUST behave as a Requesting Router.

Cellular networks are more and more perceived as an
alternative to fixed networks for home IP-based services
delivery; especially with the advent of smartphones and
3GPP data dongles. There is a need for an efficient
mechanism to assign shorter prefix than /64 to cellular
hosts so that each LAN segment can get its own /64 prefix
and multilink subnet issues to be avoided.

In case a prefix is delegated to a cellular host using
DHCPv6, the cellular device will be configured with two
prefixes:

(1) one for 3GPP link allocated using SLAAC mechanism
and

(2) another one delegated for LANs acquired during
Prefix Delegation operation.

Note that the 3GPP network architecture requires both the
WAN (Wide Area Network) and the Delegated Prefix delegated prefix to be
aggregatable, so the subscriber can be identified using a
single prefix.

Without the Prefix Exclude Option, the delegating router
(GGSN/PDN-GW)
(GGSN/PGW) will have to ensure [RFC3633] compliancy (e.g.,
halving the Delegated delegated prefix and assigning the WAN prefix
out of the 1st half and the prefix to be delegated to the
terminal from the 2nd half).

REQ#28: The cellular device MUST be compliant with the CPE
requirements specified in [RFC6204].

REQ#29: For deployments requiring to share the same /64 prefix, the
cellular device SHOULD support [I-D.ietf-v6ops-64share] to
enable sharing a /64 prefix between the 3GPP interface towards
the GGSN (WAN interface) and the LAN interfaces.

REQ#30: The cellular device SHOULD support the Customer Side
Translator (CLAT) [I-D.ietf-v6ops-464xlat]. [RFC6877].

Various IP devices are likely to be connected to cellular
device, acting as a CPE. Some of these devices can be
dual-stack, others are IPv6-only or IPv4-only. IPv6-only
connectivity for cellular device does not allow IPv4-only
sessions to be established for hosts connected on the LAN
segment of cellular devices.

In order to allow IPv4 sessions establishment initiated
from devices located on LAN segment side and target IPv4
nodes, a solution consists in integrating the CLAT function
in the cellular device. As elaborated in Section 2, the
CLAT function allows also IPv4 applications to continue
running over an IPv6-only host.

REQ#31: If a RA MTU is advertised from the 3GPP network, the
cellular device SHOULD relay that upstream MTU information to
the downstream attached LAN devices in RA.

Since 3GPP networks extensively use IP-in-IP/UDP GTP
tunnels, the effective MTU is frequently effectively
reduced to 1440 bytes. While a host may generate packets
with an MTU of 1500 bytes, this results in undesirable
fragmentation of the GTP IP/UDP packets.

Receiving and relaying RA MTU values facilitates a more
harmonious functioning of the mobile core network where end
nodes transmit packets that do not exceed the MTU size of
the mobile network's GTP tunnels.

[TS.23060] indicates providing a link MTU value of 1358
octets to the 3GPP cellular device will prevent the IP
layer fragmentation within the transport network between
the cellular device and the GGSN/PGW.

5. APIs & Applications

REQ#32: Name resolution libraries MUST support both IPv4 and IPv6.

In particular, the cellular host MUST support [RFC3596].

REQ#33: Applications MUST be independent of the underlying IP
address family.

This means applications must be IP version agnostic.

REQ#34: Applications using URIs MUST follow [RFC3986]. For example,
SIP applications MUST follow the correction defined in
[RFC5954].

6. Security Considerations

The security considerations identified in [RFC3316] [I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis]
and [RFC6459] are to be taken into account.

REQ#35: If the cellular device provides LAN features, it SHOULD be
compliant with the security requirements specified in
[RFC6092].

7. IANA Considerations

This document does not require any action from IANA.

8. Acknowledgements

Many thanks to H. Soliman, H. Singh, L. Colliti, T. Lemon, B.
Sarikaya, J. Korhonen, M. Mawatari, M. Abrahamsson, P. Vickers, V. Kuarsingh,
and J. Woodyatt for the discussion in the v6ops mailing list.

Special thanks to T. Savolainen and J. Korhonen for the detailed
review.

9. References

9.1. Normative References

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

[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
June 2002.

[RFC3596] Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi,
"DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6", RFC 3596,
October 2003.

[RFC3633] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic
Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633,
December 2003.

[RFC3736] Droms, R., "Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
(DHCP) Service for IPv6", RFC 3736, April 2004.

[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC
3986, January 2005.

[RFC4191] Draves, R. and D. Thaler, "Default Router Preferences and
More-Specific Routes", RFC 4191, November 2005.

[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
September 2007.

[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.

[RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in
IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007.

[RFC5175] Haberman, B. and R. Hinden, "IPv6 Router Advertisement
Flags Option", RFC 5175, March 2008.

[RFC5795] Sandlund, K., Pelletier, G., and L-E. Jonsson, "The RObust
Header Compression (ROHC) Framework", RFC 5795, March
2010.

[RFC5942] Singh, H., Beebee, W., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6 Subnet
Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet
Prefixes", RFC 5942, July 2010.

[RFC5954] Gurbani, V., Carpenter, B., and B. Tate, "Essential
Correction for IPv6 ABNF and URI Comparison in RFC 3261",
RFC 5954, August 2010.

[RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X.
Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052,
October 2010.

[RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli,
"IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration",
RFC 6106, November 2010.

[RFC6145] Li, X., Bao, C., and F. Baker, "IP/ICMP Translation
Algorithm", RFC 6145, April 2011.

[RFC6146] Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful
NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6
Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011.

[RFC6147] Bagnulo, M., Sullivan, A., Matthews, P., and I. van
Beijnum, "DNS64: DNS Extensions for Network Address
Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6147,
April 2011.

[RFC6434] Jankiewicz, E., Loughney, J., and T. Narten, "IPv6 Node
Requirements", RFC 6434, December 2011.

[RFC6535] Huang, B., Deng, H., and T. Savolainen, "Dual-Stack Hosts
Using "Bump-in-the-Host" (BIH)", RFC 6535, February 2012.

[RFC6555] Wing, D. and A. Yourtchenko, "Happy Eyeballs: Success with
Dual-Stack Hosts", RFC 6555, April 2012.

[RFC6603] Korhonen, J., Savolainen, T., Krishnan, S., and O. Troan,
"Prefix Exclude Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix
Delegation", RFC 6603, May 2012.

[RFC6724] Thaler, D., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown,
"Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6
(IPv6)", RFC 6724, September 2012.

9.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic]
Savolainen, T., Korhonen, J., and D. Wing, "Discovery of
the IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis", draft-
ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-16 (work in
progress), March 2013.

[I-D.ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension]
Chen, G., Williams, C., Wing, D., and A. Yourtchenko,
"Happy Eyeballs Extension for Multiple Interfaces", draft-
ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-02
ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-17 (work in
progress),
February April 2013.

[I-D.ietf-pcp-base]
Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P.
Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", draft-ietf-pcp-
base-29 (work in progress), November 2012.

[I-D.ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64]
Boucadair, M., "Learn NAT64 PREFIX64s using PCP", draft-
ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-00 (work in progress), February
2013.

[I-D.ietf-v6ops-464xlat]
Mawatari, M., Kawashima, M., and C. Byrne, "464XLAT:
Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation", draft-
ietf-v6ops-464xlat-10 (work in progress), February 2013.

[I-D.ietf-v6ops-64share]
Byrne, C., Drown, D., and V. Ales, "Extending an IPv6 /64
Prefix from a 3GPP Mobile Interface to a LAN", draft-ietf-
v6ops-64share-03
v6ops-64share-04 (work in progress), February April 2013.

[I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis]
Korhonen, J., Arkko, J., Savolainen, T., and S. Krishnan,
"IPv6 for 3GPP Cellular Hosts", draft-ietf-v6ops-
rfc3316bis-01 (work in progress), February 2013.

[RFC3314] Wasserman, M., "Recommendations

[IR92] GSMA, , "IR.92.V4.0 - IMS Profile for IPv6 in Third
Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Standards", Voice and SMS",
March 2011, <http://www.gsma.com/newsroom/ir-92-v4-0-ims-
profile-for-voice-and-sms>.

[RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC
3314, September 2002.

[RFC3316] Arkko, J., Kuijpers, G., Soliman, H., Loughney, J.,
4033, March 2005.

[RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and J.
Wiljakka, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) S.
Rose, "Resource Records for Some
Second the DNS Security Extensions",
RFC 4034, March 2005.

[RFC4035] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and Third Generation Cellular Hosts", S.
Rose, "Protocol Modifications for the DNS Security
Extensions", RFC 3316,
April 2003. 4035, March 2005.

[RFC6092] Woodyatt, J., "Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in
Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for Providing
Residential IPv6 Internet Service", RFC 6092, January
2011.

[RFC6204] Singh, H., Beebee, W., Donley, C., Stark, B., and O.
Troan, "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge
Routers", RFC 6204, April 2011.

[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.

[RFC6877] Mawatari, M., Kawashima, M., and C. Byrne, "464XLAT:
Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation", RFC
6877, April 2013.

[TS.23060]
3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service
description; Stage 2", September 2011.

[TS.23401]
3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements
for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network
(E-UTRAN) access", September 2011.

[TS.23402]
3GPP, , "Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP accesses",
September 2011.

[TS.24008]
3GPP, , "Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification;
Core network protocols; Stage 3", June 2011.

[TS.29060]
3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS
Tunnelling Protocol (GTP) across the Gn and Gp interface",
September 2011.

[TS.29274]
3GPP, , "3GPP Evolved Packet System (EPS); Evolved General
Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol for
Control plane (GTPv2-C); Stage 3", June 2011.

[TS.29281]
3GPP, , "General Packet Radio System (GPRS) Tunnelling
Protocol User Plane (GTPv1-U)", September 2011.

Authors' Addresses

David Binet
France Telecom
Rennes
France

Email: david.binet@orange.com

Mohamed Boucadair
France Telecom
Rennes 35000
France

Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com

Ales Vizdal
Deutsche Telekom AG

Email: ales.vizdal@t-mobile.cz

Cameron Byrne
T-Mobile
USA

Email: Cameron.Byrne@T-Mobile.com

Gang Chen
China Mobile

Email: phdgang@gmail.com