--- 1/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-03.txt 2013-06-11 10:14:23.457221316 +0100 +++ 2/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt 2013-06-11 10:14:23.497222386 +0100 @@ -1,24 +1,24 @@ V6OPS Working Group D. Binet Internet-Draft M. Boucadair Intended status: Informational France Telecom -Expires: October 31, 2013 A. Vizdal +Expires: December 12, 2013 A. Vizdal Deutsche Telekom AG C. Byrne T-Mobile G. Chen China Mobile - April 29, 2013 + June 10, 2013 Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices - draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-03 + draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04 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 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 cellular networks defined in @@ -37,21 +37,21 @@ 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 October 31, 2013. + This Internet-Draft will expire on December 12, 2013. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2013 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 @@ -67,23 +67,23 @@ 1.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Special Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Connectivity Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. WLAN Connectivity Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3. Advanced Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Cellular Devices with LAN Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. APIs & Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 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. @@ -103,33 +103,33 @@ implement basic IPv6 features in a cellular context. o It identifies also features to ensure IPv4 service delivery over an IPv6-only transport. This document specifies an IPv6 profile for mobile devices listing required specifications produced by various 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 mobile - network. These requirements cover various network types such as - GPRS (General Packet Radio Service), EPC (Evolved Packet Core) or - IEEE 802.11 network. + 1. List in one single document a comprehensive list of IPv6 features + for a mobile device, including both IPv6-only and dual-stack + mobile deployment contexts. These features cover various network + types such as GPRS (General Packet Radio Service), EPC (Evolved + Packet Core) or 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 + 3. Vendors to be aware of a set of features to allow for IPv6 + connectivity and IPv4 service continuity (over an 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]. @@ -331,21 +331,21 @@ connectivity. CLAT function requires a NAT64 capability [RFC6146] in the core network. REQ#14: The cellular device SHOULD embed a DNS64 function [RFC6147]. Local DNS64 functionality allows for compatibility with DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC, [RFC4033], [RFC4034], [RFC4035]). Means to configure or discover a PREFIX64 is also required on the cellular device as discussed in REQ#12. - REQ#15: The cellular host SHOULD support PCP [I-D.ietf-pcp-base]. + REQ#15: The cellular host SHOULD support PCP [RFC6887]. 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 cellular device. Indeed, because several stateful devices may be deployed in wireless networks (e.g., NAT and/or Firewalls), PCP can be used by the cellular host to control network-based NAT and Firewall functions which will reduce per-application signaling and save battery consumption. @@ -391,21 +391,21 @@ interface. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration ([RFC4862]) MUST be supported. REQ#20: DHCPv6 client SHOULD be supported on WLAN interface. Refer to Section 7.2.1 of [RFC6434]. REQ#21: WLAN interface SHOULD support Router Advertisement Options - for DNS configuration (See Section Section 7.3 of [RFC6434]). + for DNS configuration (See 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 @@ -434,62 +434,55 @@ 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 compression to 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]. - - REQ#26: The cellular host MUST comply with Section 5.3 of [RFC6434] + REQ#25: The cellular host 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 2G, 3G or 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 + REQ#26: 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. + and multi-link 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 to be aggregatable, so the subscriber can be identified using a single prefix. Without the Prefix Exclude Option, the delegating router (GGSN/PGW) will have to ensure [RFC3633] compliancy (e.g., @@ -490,92 +483,92 @@ WAN (Wide Area Network) and the delegated prefix to be aggregatable, so the subscriber can be identified using a single prefix. Without the Prefix Exclude Option, the delegating router (GGSN/PGW) will have to ensure [RFC3633] compliancy (e.g., halving the 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 + REQ#27: 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 + REQ#28: 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/PGW (WAN interface) and the LAN interfaces. - REQ#30: The cellular device SHOULD support the Customer Side + REQ#29: The cellular device SHOULD support the Customer Side Translator (CLAT) [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 + REQ#30: 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. 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. + REQ#31: 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 + REQ#32: 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, + REQ#33: 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 [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 + REQ#34: 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, M. Mawatari, M. Abrahamsson, P. Vickers, V. Kuarsingh, - and J. Woodyatt for the discussion in the v6ops mailing list. + Sarikaya, 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. @@ -607,23 +600,20 @@ "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", @@ -667,42 +657,37 @@ (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-17 (work in progress), 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 + Boucadair, M., "Learning NAT64 PREFIX64s using PCP", + draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-03 (work in progress), June 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-04 (work in progress), April 2013. + v6ops-64share-07 (work in progress), May 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. + rfc3316bis-03 (work in progress), May 2013. - [IR92] GSMA, , "IR.92.V4.0 - IMS Profile for Voice and SMS", - March 2011, . [RFC4033] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements", RFC 4033, March 2005. [RFC4034] Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S. Rose, "Resource Records for the DNS Security Extensions", RFC 4034, March 2005. @@ -721,59 +706,63 @@ [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. + [RFC6887] Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P. + Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", RFC 6887, April + 2013. + [TS.23060] - 3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service + 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service description; Stage 2", September 2011. [TS.23401] - 3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements + 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", + 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. + 3GPP, "Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification; Core + network protocols; Stage 3", June 2011. [TS.29060] - 3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS + 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 + 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 + 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