ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-13.txt> (An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC

2014-10-08 10:03:52
Hi,
Majority of modern smartphones from Sony, HTC, LG, Samsung, Nokia WP8.1 are 
compliant with CLAT+NAT64/DNS/DNS64
Together with Michał Czerwonka we created document with mandatory IPv6 
requirements, close cooperation with vendors succeeded and we managed to launch 
first terminal (Xperia Z1) in September 2013, after 12 months we have 13% of 
IPv6 only mobile users in a network. If you are mobile operator and you 
thinking about IPv6 migration you won’t have any problems with Smartphones 
(except Iphones=NO CLAT support) the way is paved for you...


  1.  Network Configuration (CLAT+NAT64+DNS)
Internet access is done by establishing one dedicated IPv6-only PDP/PDN 
context, network supports 464xlat architecture with DNS Dual-Stack (DNS64 
feature is available only for domain “ipv4only.arpa”) - RFC 6877. CLAT 
implementation is mandatory for all devices


  1.  UE, CPE vendor IPv6 mandatory requirements
2.1.Dynamic IPv6 Address Allocation + IID randomly generated (privacy address) 
+  UE shall use the IID given in PDP activation response message to configure 
its LLA (3GPP TS  
23.060<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.060>) 
http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.060/.
2.2.Customer Side Translator function (CLAT) must be embedded 
(smartphone/tablet/router) as part of 464xlat architecture  RFC 6877. The CLAT 
must support ICMP, UDP, TCP, GRE and fragmented packet. clatd.conf  - may be 
generic where the domain for nat64 prefix discovery must be “ipv4only.arpa” –  
static configuration may be required.
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/android-clat/
2.3.MTU size & device interfaces - If the network send MTU size in RA message, 
then device must set it to the radio interface otherwise set the default 
value=1500B. The CLAT demon will calculate MTU size automatically for its 
interfaces (clat and clat4).

  1.  IPv6 tethering - the CLAT helps Dual Stack tethering solution both 
USB/WIFI on the device , when APN is IPv6-only. The Global IPv6 and private 
IPv4 (clat) must be enabled on tethered LAN.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7278 (scenario 2)
3.1.RA – device sends RA message to tethered host with Ipv6 prefix information. 
Router lifetime set=9000 secs. Router sends periodically RA message – max. 
value 9000 secs.
3.2.DHCPv6 – device server relays PCO Ipv6 DNS'es addresses to tethered hosts.
3.3.DHCPv4 – device server relays  private IPv4 address and send DNS IPv4 (CLAT 
DNS-proxy)
3.4.Tethering & MTU size – device propagates MTU size 1500B to tethered clients 
interfaces ( Ipv4&Ipv6)

  1.  IPv6 LTE UE  - the device must set EIT bit=1 in “Initial Attach” message.
Roaming - when APN with IPv6 protocol fails in roaming it must automatically 
revert back APN protocol to IPv4

One thing is still missing – different APN profiles(APN name+PDP type) for 
roaming –, there are two use cases:
Euinterent – (“EU Roaming Regulation III”) Internet APN available in UE 
countries (VPLMN subscriber is allowed to use VGGSN APN)
“Roaming Fallback to IPv4” creating separate roaming profile with APN name/PDP 
(now roaming fallback is based only on PDP type Android4.x/WP8.1)

Here are the benefits of extending APN profiles:


-       APN profiles and its “zones” HPLMN/VPLMN can separate IPv6 form IPv4

-       Separate APN for HPLMN (Ipv6 only APN for HPLMN)

-       Separate  APN for VPLMN roaming (fallback to IPv4 based on APN name)

-       Euinternet APN as secondary roaming profile for manual selection

Best Regards,
Tomasz Kossut


From: Heatley, Nick [mailto:nick(_dot_)heatley(_at_)ee(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:31 AM
To: Lorenzo Colitti; IETF Discussion
Cc: v6ops(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org WG; IETF-Announce
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-13.txt> 
(An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to 
Informational RFC

2. I stand by my earlier assessment that this document's requirements are 
over-broad, and in fact so broad as to harm adoption. There may well be 
operators or device implementers that seeing with such a high number of 
requirements may shy away in terror and think that deploying IPv6 in a mobile 
network is an impossibly high amount of work. That said, given that this 
document says clearly that it is not a standard, and that compliance is not 
required, the harm it does will be limited.

There may well be operators and device implementers that see the many 
individual “IPv6” RFCs and shy away. Transitioning technologies are still 
perceived as issues for the network.
If this cross-operator document states what is required on terminals to work in 
all major/predictable IPv6 scenarios, then it is giving such people a view of 
what a “healthy and robust” terminal implementation would consist of. If they 
are able to deliver on these requirements then they can supply a terminal ready 
for all business areas /all operator network scenarios.
(It certainly stops the feedback I’ve had from certain corners “that no other 
operators are asking for IPv6”, and “what you are asking for is a single 
operator roadmap which we won’t do”. That has been the reality here). So I 
don’t see how a consolidated demand-side view from operators who are really 
trying to introduce IPv6  in mobile can harm adoption in any way.
Regards,
Nick


From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Lorenzo 
Colitti
Sent: 06 October 2014 08:30
To: IETF Discussion
Cc: v6ops(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org<mailto:v6ops(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> WG; 
IETF-Announce
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-13.txt> 
(An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to 
Informational RFC



NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended for the above-named 
person(s).  If you are not the intended recipient, notify the sender 
immediately, delete this email from your system and do not disclose or use for 
any purpose.

We may monitor all incoming and outgoing emails in line with current 
legislation. We have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments are 
free from any virus, but it remains your responsibility to ensure that viruses 
do not adversely affect you.

EE Limited
Registered in England and Wales
Company Registered Number: 02382161
Registered Office Address: Trident Place, Mosquito Way, Hatfield, 
Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>