diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc6459.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc6459.txt | 2019 |
1 files changed, 2019 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc6459.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc6459.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8307f6f --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc6459.txt @@ -0,0 +1,2019 @@ + + + + + + +Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) J. Korhonen, Ed. +Request for Comments: 6459 Nokia Siemens Networks +Category: Informational J. Soininen +ISSN: 2070-1721 Renesas Mobile + B. Patil + T. Savolainen + G. Bajko + Nokia + K. Iisakkila + Renesas Mobile + January 2012 + + + IPv6 in 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) + Evolved Packet System (EPS) + +Abstract + + The use of cellular broadband for accessing the Internet and other + data services via smartphones, tablets, and notebook/netbook + computers has increased rapidly as a result of high-speed packet data + networks such as HSPA, HSPA+, and now Long-Term Evolution (LTE) being + deployed. Operators that have deployed networks based on 3rd + Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) network architectures are + facing IPv4 address shortages at the Internet registries and are + feeling pressure to migrate to IPv6. This document describes the + support for IPv6 in 3GPP network architectures. + +Status of This Memo + + This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is + published for informational purposes. + + This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force + (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has + received public review and has been approved for publication by the + Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents + approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet + Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. + + Information about the current status of this document, any errata, + and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at + http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6459. + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (c) 2012 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. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction ....................................................4 + 2. 3GPP Terminology and Concepts ...................................5 + 2.1. Terminology ................................................5 + 2.2. The Concept of APN ........................................10 + 3. IP over 3GPP GPRS ..............................................11 + 3.1. Introduction to 3GPP GPRS .................................11 + 3.2. PDP Context ...............................................12 + 4. IP over 3GPP EPS ...............................................13 + 4.1. Introduction to 3GPP EPS ..................................13 + 4.2. PDN Connection ............................................14 + 4.3. EPS Bearer Model ..........................................15 + 5. Address Management .............................................16 + 5.1. IPv4 Address Configuration ................................16 + 5.2. IPv6 Address Configuration ................................16 + 5.3. Prefix Delegation .........................................17 + 5.4. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Considerations ....................18 + 6. 3GPP Dual-Stack Approach to IPv6 ...............................18 + 6.1. 3GPP Networks Prior to Release-8 ..........................18 + 6.2. 3GPP Release-8 and -9 Networks ............................20 + 6.3. PDN Connection Establishment Process ......................21 + 6.4. Mobility of 3GPP IPv4v6 Bearers ...........................23 + 7. Dual-Stack Approach to IPv6 Transition in 3GPP Networks ........24 + 8. Deployment Issues ..............................................25 + 8.1. Overlapping IPv4 Addresses ................................25 + 8.2. IPv6 for Transport ........................................26 + 8.3. Operational Aspects of Running Dual-Stack Networks ........26 + 8.4. Operational Aspects of Running a Network with + IPv6-Only Bearers .........................................27 + 8.5. Restricting Outbound IPv6 Roaming .........................28 + 8.6. Inter-RAT Handovers and IP Versions .......................29 + 8.7. Provisioning of IPv6 Subscribers and Various + Combinations during Initial Network Attachment ............29 + 9. Security Considerations ........................................31 + 10. Summary and Conclusions .......................................32 + 11. Acknowledgements ..............................................32 + 12. Informative References ........................................33 + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +1. Introduction + + IPv6 support has been part of the 3rd Generation Partnership Project + (3GPP) standards since the first release of the specifications + (Release 99). This support extends to all radio access and packet- + based system variants of the 3GPP architecture family. In addition, + a lot of work has been invested by the industry to investigate + different transition and deployment scenarios over the years. + However, IPv6 deployment in commercial networks remains low. There + are many factors that can be attributed to this lack of deployment. + The most relevant factor is essentially the same as the reason for + IPv6 not being deployed in other networks either, i.e., the lack of + business and commercial incentives for deployment. + + 3GPP network architectures have continued to evolve in the time since + Release 99, which was finalized in early 2000. The most recent + version of the 3GPP architecture, the Evolved Packet System (EPS) -- + commonly referred to as System Architecture Evolution (SAE), Long- + Term Evolution (LTE), or Release-8 -- is a packet-centric + architecture. In addition, the number of subscribers and devices + using the 3GPP networks for Internet connectivity and data services + has also increased phenomenally -- the number of mobile broadband + subscribers has increased exponentially over the last couple of + years. + + With subscriber growth projected to increase even further, and with + recent depletion of available IPv4 address space by IANA, 3GPP + operators and vendors are now in the process of identifying the + scenarios and solutions needed to deploy IPv6. + + This document describes the establishment of IP connectivity in 3GPP + network architectures, specifically in the context of IP bearers for + 3G General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) and for EPS. It provides an + overview of how IPv6 is supported as per the current set of 3GPP + specifications. Some of the issues and concerns with respect to + deployment and shortage of private IPv4 addresses within a single + network domain are also discussed. + + The IETF has specified a set of tools and mechanisms that can be + utilized for transitioning to IPv6. In addition to operating dual- + stack networks during the transition from IPv4 to IPv6, the two + alternative categories for the transition are encapsulation and + translation. The IETF continues to specify additional solutions for + enabling the transition based on the deployment scenarios and + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + operator/ISP requirements. There is no single approach for + transition to IPv6 that can meet the needs for all deployments and + models. The 3GPP scenarios for transition, described in [TR.23975], + can be addressed using transition mechanisms that are already + available in the toolbox. The objective of transition to IPv6 in + 3GPP networks is to ensure that: + + 1. Legacy devices and hosts that have an IPv4-only stack will + continue to be provided with IP connectivity to the Internet and + services. + + 2. Devices that are dual-stack can access the Internet either via + IPv6 or IPv4. The choice of using IPv6 or IPv4 depends on the + capability of: + + A. the application on the host, + + B. the support for IPv4 and IPv6 bearers by the network, and/or + + C. the server(s) and other end points. + + 3GPP networks are capable of providing a host with IPv4 and IPv6 + connectivity today, albeit in many cases with upgrades to network + elements such as the Serving GPRS Support Node (SGSN) and the Gateway + GPRS Support Node (GGSN). + +2. 3GPP Terminology and Concepts + +2.1. Terminology + + Access Point Name + + The Access Point Name (APN) is a Fully Qualified Domain Name + (FQDN) and resolves to a set of gateways in an operator's network. + The APNs are piggybacked on the administration of the DNS + namespace. + + Dual Address PDN/PDP Type + + The dual address Packet Data Network/Packet Data Protocol (PDN/ + PDP) Type (IPv4v6) is used in 3GPP context in many cases as a + synonym for dual-stack, i.e., a connection type capable of serving + both IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously. + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + Evolved Packet Core + + The Evolved Packet Core (EPC) is an evolution of the 3GPP GPRS + system characterized by a higher-data-rate, lower-latency, packet- + optimized system. The EPC comprises subcomponents such as the + Mobility Management Entity (MME), Serving Gateway (SGW), Packet + Data Network Gateway (PDN-GW), and Home Subscriber Server (HSS). + + Evolved Packet System + + The Evolved Packet System (EPS) is an evolution of the 3GPP GPRS + system characterized by a higher-data-rate, lower-latency, packet- + optimized system that supports multiple Radio Access Technologies + (RATs). The EPS comprises the EPC together with the Evolved + Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA) and the Evolved + Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN). + + Evolved UTRAN + + The Evolved UTRAN (E-UTRAN) is a communications network, sometimes + referred to as 4G, and consists of eNodeBs (4G base stations), + which make up the E-UTRAN. The E-UTRAN allows connectivity + between the User Equipment and the core network. + + GPRS Tunnelling Protocol + + The GPRS Tunnelling Protocol (GTP) [TS.29060] [TS.29274] + [TS.29281] is a tunnelling protocol defined by 3GPP. It is a + network-based mobility protocol and is similar to Proxy Mobile + IPv6 (PMIPv6) [RFC5213]. However, GTP also provides functionality + beyond mobility, such as in-band signaling related to Quality of + Service (QoS) and charging, among others. + + GSM EDGE Radio Access Network + + The Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) EDGE Radio + Access Network (GERAN) is a communications network, commonly + referred to as 2G or 2.5G, and consists of base stations and Base + Station Controllers (BSCs), which make up the GSM EDGE radio + access network. The GERAN allows connectivity between the User + Equipment and the core network. + + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + Gateway GPRS Support Node + + The Gateway GPRS Support Node (GGSN) is a gateway function in the + GPRS that provides connectivity to the Internet or other PDNs. + The host attaches to a GGSN identified by an APN assigned to it by + an operator. The GGSN also serves as the topological anchor for + addresses/prefixes assigned to the User Equipment. + + General Packet Radio Service + + The General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) is a packet-oriented + mobile data service available to users of the 2G and 3G cellular + communication systems -- the GSM -- specified by 3GPP. + + High-Speed Packet Access + + The High-Speed Packet Access (HSPA) and HSPA+ are enhanced + versions of the Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) and + UTRAN, thus providing more data throughput and lower latencies. + + Home Location Register + + The Home Location Register (HLR) is a pre-Release-5 database (but + is also used in Release-5 and later networks in real deployments) + that contains subscriber data and information related to call + routing. All subscribers of an operator, and the subscribers' + enabled services, are provisioned in the HLR. + + Home Subscriber Server + + The Home Subscriber Server (HSS) is a database for a given + subscriber and was introduced in 3GPP Release-5. It is the entity + containing the subscription-related information to support the + network entities actually handling calls/sessions. + + Mobility Management Entity + + The Mobility Management Entity (MME) is a network element that is + responsible for control-plane functionalities, including + authentication, authorization, bearer management, layer-2 + mobility, etc. The MME is essentially the control-plane part of + the SGSN in the GPRS. The user-plane traffic bypasses the MME. + + Mobile Terminal + + The Mobile Terminal (MT) is the modem and the radio part of the + Mobile Station (MS). + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 7] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + Public Land Mobile Network + + The Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) is a network that is + operated by a single administration. A PLMN (and therefore also + an operator) is identified by the Mobile Country Code (MCC) and + the Mobile Network Code (MNC). Each (telecommunications) operator + providing mobile services has its own PLMN. + + Policy and Charging Control + + The Policy and Charging Control (PCC) framework is used for QoS + policy and charging control. It has two main functions: flow- + based charging, including online credit control; and policy + control (e.g., gating control, QoS control, and QoS signaling). + It is optional to 3GPP EPS but needed if dynamic policy and + charging control by means of PCC rules based on user and services + are desired. + + Packet Data Network + + The Packet Data Network (PDN) is a packet-based network that + either belongs to the operator or is an external network such as + the Internet or a corporate intranet. The user eventually + accesses services in one or more PDNs. The operator's packet core + networks are separated from packet data networks either by GGSNs + or PDN Gateways (PDN-GWs). + + Packet Data Network Gateway + + The Packet Data Network Gateway (PDN-GW) is a gateway function in + the Evolved Packet System (EPS), which provides connectivity to + the Internet or other PDNs. The host attaches to a PDN-GW + identified by an APN assigned to it by an operator. The PDN-GW + also serves as the topological anchor for addresses/prefixes + assigned to the User Equipment. + + Packet Data Protocol Context + + A Packet Data Protocol (PDP) context is the equivalent of a + virtual connection between the User Equipment (UE) and a PDN using + a specific gateway. + + Packet Data Protocol Type + + A Packet Data Protocol Type (PDP Type) identifies the used/allowed + protocols within the PDP context. Examples are IPv4, IPv6, and + IPv4v6 (dual-stack). + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 8] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + S4 Serving GPRS Support Node + + The S4 Serving GPRS Support Node (S4-SGSN) is compliant with a + Release-8 (and onwards) SGSN that connects 2G/3G radio access + networks to the EPC via new Release-8 interfaces like S3, S4, + and S6d. + + Serving Gateway + + The Serving Gateway (SGW) is a gateway function in the EPS, which + terminates the interface towards the E-UTRAN. The SGW is the + Mobility Anchor point for layer-2 mobility (inter-eNodeB + handovers). For each UE connected with the EPS, at any given + point in time, there is only one SGW. The SGW is essentially the + user-plane part of the GPRS's SGSN. + + Serving GPRS Support Node + + The Serving GPRS Support Node (SGSN) is a network element that is + located between the radio access network (RAN) and the gateway + (GGSN). A per-UE point-to-point (p2p) tunnel between the GGSN and + SGSN transports the packets between the UE and the gateway. + + Terminal Equipment + + The Terminal Equipment (TE) is any device/host connected to the + Mobile Terminal (MT) offering services to the user. A TE may + communicate to an MT, for example, over the Point to Point + Protocol (PPP). + + UE, MS, MN, and Mobile + + The terms UE (User Equipment), MS (Mobile Station), MN (Mobile + Node), and mobile refer to the devices that are hosts with the + ability to obtain Internet connectivity via a 3GPP network. A MS + is comprised of the Terminal Equipment (TE) and a Mobile Terminal + (MT). The terms UE, MS, MN, and mobile are used interchangeably + within this document. + + UMTS Terrestrial Radio Access Network + + The Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) Terrestrial + Radio Access Network (UTRAN) is a communications network, commonly + referred to as 3G, and consists of NodeBs (3G base stations) and + Radio Network Controllers (RNCs), which make up the UMTS radio + access network. The UTRAN allows connectivity between the UE and + the core network. The UTRAN is comprised of WCDMA, HSPA, and + HSPA+ radio technologies. + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 9] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + User Plane + + The user plane refers to data traffic and the required bearers for + the data traffic. In practice, IP is the only data traffic + protocol used in the user plane. + + Wideband Code Division Multiple Access + + The Wideband Code Division Multiple Access (WCDMA) is the radio + interface used in UMTS networks. + + eNodeB + + The eNodeB is a base station entity that supports the Long-Term + Evolution (LTE) air interface. + +2.2. The Concept of APN + + The Access Point Name (APN) essentially refers to a gateway in the + 3GPP network. The 'complete' APN is expressed in a form of a Fully + Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) and also piggybacked on the + administration of the DNS namespace, thus effectively allowing the + discovery of gateways using the DNS. The UE can choose to attach to + a specific gateway in the packet core. The gateway provides + connectivity to the Packet Data Network (PDN), such as the Internet. + An operator may also include gateways that do not provide Internet + connectivity but rather provide connectivity to a closed network + providing a set of the operator's own services. A UE can be attached + to one or more gateways simultaneously. The gateway in a 3GPP + network is the GGSN or PDN-GW. Figure 1 illustrates the APN-based + network connectivity concept. + + .--. + _(. `) + .--. +------------+ _( PDN `)_ + _(Core`. |GW1 |====( Internet `) + +---+ ( NW )------|APN=internet| ( ` . ) ) + [UE]~~~~|RAN|----( ` . ) )--+ +------------+ `--(_______)---' + ^ +---+ `--(___.-' | + | | .--. + | | +----------+ _(.PDN`) + | +--|GW2 | _(Operator`)_ + | |APN=OpServ|====( Services `) + UE is attached +----------+ ( ` . ) ) + to GW1 and GW2 `--(_______)---' + simultaneously + + Figure 1: User Equipment Attached to Multiple APNs Simultaneously + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 10] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +3. IP over 3GPP GPRS + +3.1. Introduction to 3GPP GPRS + + A simplified 2G/3G GPRS architecture is illustrated in Figure 2. + This architecture basically covers the GPRS core network from R99 to + Release-7, and radio access technologies such as GSM (2G), EDGE (2G, + often referred to as 2.5G), WCDMA (3G), and HSPA(+) (3G, often + referred to as 3.5G). The architecture shares obvious similarities + with the Evolved Packet System (EPS), as will be seen in Section 4. + Based on Gn/Gp interfaces, the GPRS core network functionality is + logically implemented on two network nodes -- the SGSN and the GGSN. + + 3G + .--. .--. + Uu _( `. Iu +----+ +----+ _( `. + [UE]~~|~~~( UTRAN )--|---|SGSN|--|---|GGSN|--|----( PDN ) + ( ` . ) ) +----+ Gn +----+ Gi ( ` . ) ) + `--(___.-' / | `--(___.-' + / | + 2G Gb-- | + .--. / | + _( `. / --Gp + [UE]~~|~~~( PDN )__/ | + Um ( ` . ) ) .--. + `--(___.-' _(. `) + _( [GGSN] `)_ + ( other `) + ( ` . PLMN ) ) + `--(_______)---' + + Figure 2: Overview of the 2G/3G GPRS Logical Architecture + + Gn/Gp: Interfaces that provide a network-based mobility service for + a UE and are used between an SGSN and a GGSN. The Gn + interface is used when the GGSN and SGSN are located inside + one operator (i.e., a PLMN). The Gp-interface is used if the + GGSN and the SGSN are located in different operator domains + (i.e., a different PLMN). GTP is defined for the Gn/Gp + interfaces (both GTP-C for the control plane and GTP-U for + the user plane). + + Gb: The Base Station System (BSS)-to-SGSN interface, which is + used to carry information concerning packet data transmission + and layer-2 mobility management. The Gb-interface is based + on either Frame Relay or IP. + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 11] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + Iu: The Radio Network System (RNS)-to-SGSN interface, which is + used to carry information concerning packet data transmission + and layer-2 mobility management. The user-plane part of the + Iu-interface (actually the Iu-PS) is based on GTP-U. The + control-plane part of the Iu-interface is based on the Radio + Access Network Application Protocol (RANAP). + + Gi: The interface between the GGSN and a PDN. The PDN may be an + operator's external public or private packet data network, or + an intra-operator packet data network. + + Uu/Um: 2G or 3G radio interfaces between a UE and a respective radio + access network. + + The SGSN is responsible for the delivery of data packets from and to + the UE within its geographical service area when a direct tunnel + option is not used. If the direct tunnel is used, then the user + plane goes directly between the RNC (in the RNS) and the GGSN. The + control-plane traffic always goes through the SGSN. For each UE + connected with the GPRS, at any given point in time, there is only + one SGSN. + +3.2. PDP Context + + A PDP (Packet Data Protocol) context is an association between a UE + represented by one IPv4 address and/or one /64 IPv6 prefix, and a PDN + represented by an APN. Each PDN can be accessed via a gateway + (typically a GGSN or PDN-GW). On the UE, a PDP context is equivalent + to a network interface. A UE may hence be attached to one or more + gateways via separate connections, i.e., PDP contexts. 3GPP GPRS + supports PDP Types IPv4, IPv6, and since Release-9, PDP Type IPv4v6 + (dual-stack) as well. + + Each primary PDP context has its own IPv4 address and/or one /64 IPv6 + prefix assigned to it by the PDN and anchored in the corresponding + gateway. The GGSN or PDN-GW is the first-hop router for the UE. + Applications on the UE use the appropriate network interface (PDP + context) for connectivity to a specific PDN. Figure 3 represents a + high-level view of what a PDP context implies in 3GPP networks. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 12] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + Y + | +---------+ .--. + |--+ __________________________ | APNx in | _( `. + | |O______PDPc1_______________)| GGSN / |----(Internet) + | | | PDN-GW | ( ` . ) ) + |UE| +---------+ `--(___.-' + | | _______________________ +---------+ .--. + | |O______PDPc2____________)| APNy in | _(Priv`. + +--+ | GGSN / |-------(Network ) + | PDN-GW | ( ` . ) ) + +---------+ `--(___.-' + + Figure 3: PDP Contexts between the MS/UE and Gateway + + In the above figure, there are two PDP contexts at the MS/UE: the + 'PDPc1' PDP context, which is connected to APNx, provides Internet + connectivity, and the 'PDPc2' PDP context provides connectivity to a + private IP network via APNy (as an example, this network may include + operator-specific services, such as the MMS (Multimedia Messaging + Service)). An application on the host, such as a web browser, would + use the PDP context that provides Internet connectivity for accessing + services on the Internet. An application such as a MMS would use + APNy in the figure above, because the service is provided through the + private network. + +4. IP over 3GPP EPS + +4.1. Introduction to 3GPP EPS + + In its most basic form, the EPS architecture consists of only two + nodes on the user plane: a base station and a core network Gateway + (GW). The basic EPS architecture is illustrated in Figure 4. The + functional split of gateways allows operators to choose optimized + topological locations of nodes within the network and enables various + deployment models, including the sharing of radio networks between + different operators. This also allows independent scaling, growth of + traffic throughput, and control-signal processing. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 13] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + +--------+ + | IP | + S1-MME +-------+ S11 |Services| + +----|----| MME |----|----+ +--------+ + | | | | |SGi + | +-------+ | S5/ | + +----+ LTE-Uu +-------+ S1-U +-------+ S8 +-------+ + |UE |----|---|eNodeB |---|-----------------| SGW |--|---|PDN-GW | + | |========|=======|=====================|=======|======| | + +----+ +-------+Dual-Stack EPS Bearer+-------+ +-------+ + + Figure 4: EPS Architecture for 3GPP Access + + S5/S8: Provides user-plane tunnelling and tunnel management between + the SGW and PDN-GW, using GTP (both GTP-U and GTP-C) or + PMIPv6 [RFC5213] [TS.23402] as the network-based mobility + management protocol. The S5 interface is used when the + PDN-GW and SGW are located inside one operator (i.e., a + PLMN). The S8-interface is used if the PDN-GW and the SGW + are located in different operator domains (i.e., a different + PLMN). + + S11: Reference point for the control-plane protocol between the + MME and SGW, based on GTP-C (GTP control plane) and used, + for example, during the establishment or modification of the + default bearer. + + S1-U: Provides user-plane tunnelling and inter-eNodeB path + switching during handover between the eNodeB and SGW, using + GTP-U (GTP user plane). + + S1-MME: Reference point for the control-plane protocol between the + eNodeB and MME. + + SGi: The interface between the PDN-GW and the PDN. The PDN may + be an operator-external public or private packet data + network or an intra-operator packet data network. + +4.2. PDN Connection + + A PDN connection is an association between a UE represented by one + IPv4 address and/or one /64 IPv6 prefix, and a PDN represented by an + APN. The PDN connection is the EPC equivalent of the GPRS PDP + context. Each PDN can be accessed via a gateway (a PDN-GW). The PDN + is responsible for the IP address/prefix allocation to the UE. On + the UE, a PDN connection is equivalent to a network interface. A UE + may hence be attached to one or more gateways via separate + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 14] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + connections, i.e., PDN connections. 3GPP EPS supports PDN Types IPv4, + IPv6, and IPv4v6 (dual-stack) since the beginning of EPS, i.e., since + Release-8. + + Each PDN connection has its own IP address/prefix assigned to it by + the PDN and anchored in the corresponding gateway. In the case of + the GTP-based S5/S8 interface, the PDN-GW is the first-hop router for + the UE, and in the case of PMIPv6-based S5/S8, the SGW is the first- + hop router. Applications on the UE use the appropriate network + interface (PDN connection) for connectivity. + +4.3. EPS Bearer Model + + The logical concept of a bearer has been defined to be an aggregate + of one or more IP flows related to one or more services. An EPS + bearer exists between the UE and the PDN-GW and is used to provide + the same level of packet-forwarding treatment to the aggregated IP + flows constituting the bearer. Services with IP flows requiring + different packet-forwarding treatment would therefore require more + than one EPS bearer. The UE performs the binding of the uplink IP + flows to the bearer, while the PDN-GW performs this function for the + downlink packets. + + In order to always provide low latency on connectivity, a default + bearer will be provided at the time of startup, and an IPv4 address + and/or IPv6 prefix gets assigned to the UE (this is different from + GPRS, where UEs are not automatically connected to a PDN and + therefore do not get an IPv4 address and/or IPv6 prefix assigned + until they activate their first PDP context). This default bearer + will be allowed to carry all traffic that is not associated with a + dedicated bearer. Dedicated bearers are used to carry traffic for IP + flows that have been identified to require specific packet-forwarding + treatment. They may be established at the time of startup -- for + example, in the case of services that require always-on connectivity + and better QoS than that provided by the default bearer. The default + bearer and the dedicated bearer(s) associated to it share the same IP + address(es)/prefix. + + An EPS bearer is referred to as a Guaranteed Bit Rate (GBR) bearer if + dedicated network resources related to a GBR value that is associated + with the EPS bearer are permanently allocated (e.g., by an admission + control function in the eNodeB) at bearer establishment/modification. + Otherwise, an EPS bearer is referred to as a non-GBR bearer. The + default bearer is always non-GBR, with the resources for the IP flows + not guaranteed at the eNodeB, and with no admission control. + However, the dedicated bearer can be either GBR or non-GBR. A GBR + bearer has a GBR and Maximum Bit Rate (MBR), while more than one + non-GBR bearer belonging to the same UE shares an Aggregate MBR + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 15] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + (AMBR). Non-GBR bearers can suffer packet loss under congestion, + while GBR bearers are immune to such losses as long as they honor the + contracted bit rates. + +5. Address Management + +5.1. IPv4 Address Configuration + + The UE's IPv4 address configuration is always performed during PDP + context/EPS bearer setup procedures (on layer 2). DHCPv4-based + [RFC2131] address configuration is supported by the 3GPP + specifications, but is not used on a wide scale. The UE must always + support address configuration as part of the bearer setup signaling, + since DHCPv4 is optional for both UEs and networks. + + The 3GPP standards also specify a 'deferred IPv4 address allocation' + on a PMIPv6-based dual-stack IPv4v6 PDN connection at the time of + connection establishment, as described in Section 4.7.1 of + [TS.23402]. This has the advantage of a single PDN connection for + IPv6 and IPv4, along with deferring IPv4 address allocation until an + application needs it. The deferred address allocation is based on + the use of DHCPv4 as well as appropriate UE-side implementation- + dependent triggers to invoke the protocol. + +5.2. IPv6 Address Configuration + + IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC), as specified in + [RFC4861] and [RFC4862], is the only supported address configuration + mechanism. Stateful DHCPv6-based address configuration [RFC3315] is + not supported by 3GPP specifications. On the other hand, stateless + DHCPv6 service to obtain other configuration information is supported + [RFC3736]. This implies that the M-bit is always zero and that the + O-bit may be set to one in the Router Advertisement (RA) sent to + the UE. + + The 3GPP network allocates each default bearer a unique /64 prefix, + and uses layer-2 signaling to suggest to the UE an Interface + Identifier that is guaranteed not to conflict with the gateway's + Interface Identifier. The UE must configure its link-local address + using this Interface Identifier. The UE is allowed to use any + Interface Identifier it wishes for the other addresses it configures. + There is no restriction, for example, on using privacy extensions for + SLAAC [RFC4941] or other similar types of mechanisms. However, there + are network drivers that fail to pass the Interface Identifier to the + stack and instead synthesize their own Interface Identifier (usually + a Media Access Control (MAC) address equivalent). If the UE skips + the Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) and also has other issues with + the Neighbor Discovery protocol (see Section 5.4), then there is a + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 16] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + small theoretical chance that the UE will configure exactly the same + link-local address as the GGSN/PDN-GW. The address collision may + then cause issues in IP connectivity -- for instance, the UE not + being able to forward any packets to the uplink. + + In the 3GPP link model, the /64 prefix assigned to the UE cannot be + used for on-link determination (because the L-bit in the Prefix + Information Option (PIO) in the RA must always be set to zero). If + the advertised prefix is used for SLAAC, then the A-bit in the PIO + must be set to one. Details of the 3GPP link-model and address + configuration are provided in Section 11.2.1.3.2a of [TS.29061]. + More specifically, the GGSN/PDN-GW guarantees that the /64 prefix is + unique for the UE. Therefore, there is no need to perform any DAD on + addresses the UE creates (i.e., the 'DupAddrDetectTransmits' variable + in the UE could be zero). The GGSN/PDN-GW is not allowed to generate + any globally unique IPv6 addresses for itself using the /64 prefix + assigned to the UE in the RA. + + The current 3GPP architecture limits the number of prefixes in each + bearer to a single /64 prefix. If the UE finds more than one prefix + in the RA, it only considers the first one and silently discards the + others [TS.29061]. Therefore, multi-homing within a single bearer is + not possible. Renumbering without closing the layer-2 connection is + also not possible. The lifetime of the /64 prefix is bound to the + lifetime of the layer-2 connection even if the advertised prefix + lifetime is longer than the layer-2 connection lifetime. + +5.3. Prefix Delegation + + IPv6 prefix delegation is a part of Release-10 and is not covered by + any earlier releases. However, the /64 prefix allocated for each + default bearer (and to the UE) may be shared to the local area + network by the UE implementing Neighbor Discovery proxy (ND proxy) + [RFC4389] functionality. + + The Release-10 prefix delegation uses the DHCPv6-based prefix + delegation [RFC3633]. The model defined for Release-10 requires + aggregatable prefixes, which means the /64 prefix allocated for the + default bearer (and to the UE) must be part of the shorter delegated + prefix. DHCPv6 prefix delegation has an explicit limitation, + described in Section 12.1 of [RFC3633], that a prefix delegated to a + requesting router cannot be used by the delegating router (i.e., the + PDN-GW in this case). This implies that the shorter 'delegated + prefix' cannot be given to the requesting router (i.e., the UE) as + such but has to be delivered by the delegating router (i.e., the + PDN-GW) in such a way that the /64 prefix allocated to the default + bearer is not part of the 'delegated prefix'. An option to exclude a + prefix from delegation [PD-EXCLUDE] prevents this problem. + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 17] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +5.4. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Considerations + + The 3GPP link between the UE and the next-hop router (e.g., the GGSN) + resembles a point-to-point (p2p) link, which has no link-layer + addresses [RFC3316], and this has not changed from the 2G/3G GPRS to + the EPS. The UE IP stack has to take this into consideration. When + the 3GPP PDP context appears as a PPP interface/link to the UE, the + IP stack is usually prepared to handle the Neighbor Discovery + protocol and the related Neighbor Cache state machine transitions in + an appropriate way, even though Neighbor Discovery protocol messages + contain no link-layer address information. However, some operating + systems discard Router Advertisements on their PPP interface/link as + a default setting. This causes SLAAC to fail when the 3GPP PDP + context gets established, thus stalling all IPv6 traffic. + + Currently, several operating systems and their network drivers can + make the 3GPP PDP context appear as an IEEE 802 interface/link to the + IP stack. This has a few known issues, especially when the IP stack + is made to believe that the underlying link has link-layer addresses. + First, the Neighbor Advertisement sent by a GGSN as a response to a + Neighbor Solicitation triggered by address resolution might not + contain a Target Link-Layer Address option (see Section 4.4 of + [RFC4861]). It is then possible that the address resolution never + completes when the UE tries to resolve the link-layer address of the + GGSN, thus stalling all IPv6 traffic. + + Second, the GGSN may simply discard all Neighbor Solicitation + messages triggered by address resolution (as Section 2.4.1 of + [RFC3316] is sometimes misinterpreted as saying that responding to + address resolution and next-hop determination is not needed). As a + result, the address resolution never completes when the UE tries to + resolve the link-layer address of the GGSN, thus stalling all IPv6 + traffic. There is little that can be done about this in the GGSN, + assuming the neighbor-discovery implementation already does the right + thing. But the UE stacks must be able to handle address resolution + in the manner that they have chosen to represent the interface. In + other words, if they emulate IEEE 802 interfaces, they also need to + process Neighbor Discovery messages correctly. + +6. 3GPP Dual-Stack Approach to IPv6 + +6.1. 3GPP Networks Prior to Release-8 + + 3GPP standards prior to Release-8 provide IPv6 access for cellular + devices with PDP contexts of type IPv6 [TS.23060]. For dual-stack + access, a PDP context of type IPv6 is established in parallel to the + PDP context of type IPv4, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. For IPv4-only + service, connections are created over the PDP context of type IPv4, + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 18] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + and for IPv6-only service, connections are created over the PDP + context of type IPv6. The two PDP contexts of different type may use + the same APN (and the gateway); however, this aspect is not + explicitly defined in standards. Therefore, cellular device and + gateway implementations from different vendors may have varying + support for this functionality. + + Y .--. + | _(IPv4`. + |---+ +---+ +---+ ( PDN ) + | D |~~~~~~~//-----| |====| |====( ` . ) ) + | S | IPv4 context | S | | G | `--(___.-' + | | | G | | G | .--. + | U | | S | | S | _(IPv6`. + | E | IPv6 context | N | | N | ( PDN ) + |///|~~~~~~~//-----| |====|(s)|====( ` . ) ) + +---+ +---+ +---+ `--(___.-' + + Figure 5: Dual-Stack (DS) User Equipment Connecting to Both IPv4 and + IPv6 Internet Using Parallel IPv4-Only and IPv6-Only PDP Contexts + + Y + | + |---+ +---+ +---+ + | D |~~~~~~~//-----| |====| | .--. + | S | IPv4 context | S | | G | _( DS `. + | | | G | | G | ( PDN ) + | U | | S | | S |====( ` . ) ) + | E | IPv6 context | N | | N | `--(___.-' + |///|~~~~~~~//-----| |====| | + +---+ +---+ +---+ + + Figure 6: Dual-Stack User Equipment Connecting to Dual-Stack Internet + Using Parallel IPv4-Only and IPv6-Only PDP Contexts + + The approach of having parallel IPv4 and IPv6 types of PDP contexts + open is not optimal, because two PDP contexts require double the + signaling and consume more network resources than a single PDP + context. In Figure 6, the IPv4 and IPv6 PDP contexts are attached to + the same GGSN. While this is possible, the dual-stack MS may be + attached to different GGSNs in the scenario where one GGSN supports + IPv4 PDN connectivity while another GGSN provides IPv6 PDN + connectivity. + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 19] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +6.2. 3GPP Release-8 and -9 Networks + + Since 3GPP Release-8, the powerful concept of a dual-stack type of + PDN connection and EPS bearer has been introduced [TS.23401]. This + enables parallel use of both IPv4 and IPv6 on a single bearer + (IPv4v6), as illustrated in Figure 7, and makes dual stack simpler + than in earlier 3GPP releases. As of Release-9, GPRS network nodes + also support dual-stack (IPv4v6) PDP contexts. + + Y + | + |---+ +---+ +---+ + | D | | | | P | .--. + | S | | | | D | _( DS `. + | | IPv4v6 (DS) | S | | N | ( PDN ) + | U |~~~~~~~//-----| G |====| - |====( ` . ) ) + | E | bearer | W | | G | `--(___.-' + |///| | | | W | + +---+ +---+ +---+ + + Figure 7: Dual-Stack User Equipment Connecting to Dual-Stack Internet + Using a Single IPv4v6 PDN Connection + + The following is a description of the various PDP contexts/PDN bearer + types that are specified by 3GPP: + + 1. For 2G/3G access to the GPRS core (SGSN/GGSN) pre-Release-9, + there are two IP PDP Types: IPv4 and IPv6. Two PDP contexts are + needed to get dual-stack connectivity. + + 2. For 2G/3G access to the GPRS core (SGSN/GGSN), starting with + Release-9, there are three IP PDP Types: IPv4, IPv6, and IPv4v6. + A minimum of one PDP context is needed to get dual-stack + connectivity. + + 3. For 2G/3G access to the EPC (PDN-GW via S4-SGSN), starting with + Release-8, there are three IP PDP Types: IPv4, IPv6, and IPv4v6 + (which gets mapped to the PDN connection type). A minimum of one + PDP context is needed to get dual-stack connectivity. + + 4. For LTE (E-UTRAN) access to the EPC, starting with Release-8, + there are three IP PDN Types: IPv4, IPv6, and IPv4v6. A minimum + of one PDN connection is needed to get dual-stack connectivity. + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 20] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +6.3. PDN Connection Establishment Process + + The PDN connection establishment process is specified in detail in + 3GPP specifications. Figure 8 illustrates the high-level process and + signaling involved in the establishment of a PDN connection. + + UE eNodeB/ MME SGW PDN-GW HSS/ + | BS | | | AAA + | | | | | | + |---------->|(1) | | | | + | |---------->|(1) | | | + | | | | | | + |/---------------------------------------------------------\| + | Authentication and Authorization |(2) + |\---------------------------------------------------------/| + | | | | | | + | | |---------->|(3) | | + | | | |---------->|(3) | + | | | | | | + | | | |<----------|(4) | + | | |<----------|(4) | | + | |<----------|(5) | | | + |/---------\| | | | | + | RB setup |(6) | | | | + |\---------/| | | | | + | |---------->|(7) | | | + |---------->|(8) | | | | + | |---------->|(9) | | | + | | | | | | + |============= Uplink Data =========>==========>|(10) | + | | | | | | + | | |---------->|(11) | | + | | | | | | + | | |<----------|(12) | | + | | | | | | + |<============ Downlink Data =======<===========|(13) | + | | | | | | + + Figure 8: Simplified PDN Connection Setup Procedure in Release-8 + + + + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 21] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + 1. The UE (i.e., the MS) requires a data connection and hence + decides to establish a PDN connection with a PDN-GW. The UE + sends an "Attach" request (layer-2) to the base station (BS). + The BS forwards this Attach request to the MME. + + 2. Authentication of the UE with the Authentication, Authorization, + and Accounting (AAA) server/HSS follows. If the UE is + authorized to establish a data connection, the process continues + with the following steps: + + 3. The MME sends a "Create Session" request message to the SGW. + The SGW forwards the Create Session request to the PDN-GW. The + SGW knows the address of the PDN-GW to which it forwards the + Create Session request as a result of this information having + been obtained by the MME during the authentication/authorization + phase. + + The UE IPv4 address and/or IPv6 prefix gets assigned during this + step. If a subscribed IPv4 address and/or IPv6 prefix is + statically allocated for the UE for this APN, then the MME + passes this previously allocated address information to the SGW + and eventually to the PDN-GW in the Create Session request + message. Otherwise, the PDN-GW manages the address assignment + to the UE (there is another variation to this step where IPv4 + address allocation is delayed until the UE initiates a DHCPv4 + exchange, but this is not discussed here). + + 4. The PDN-GW creates a PDN connection for the UE and sends a + Create Session response message to the SGW from which the + session request message was received. The SGW forwards the + response to the corresponding MME that originated the request. + + 5. The MME sends the "Attach Accept/Initial Context Setup" request + message to the eNodeB/BS. + + 6. The radio bearer (RB) between the UE and the eNodeB is + reconfigured based on the parameters received from the MME. + (See Note 1 below.) + + 7. The eNodeB sends an "Initial Context" response message to + the MME. + + 8. The UE sends a "Direct Transfer" message, which includes the + "Attach Complete" signal, to the eNodeB. + + 9. The eNodeB forwards the Attach Complete message to the MME. + + 10. The UE can now start sending uplink packets to the PDN GW. + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 22] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + 11. The MME sends a "Modify Bearer" request message to the SGW. + + 12. The SGW responds with a Modify Bearer response message. At this + time, the downlink connection is also ready. + + 13. The UE can now start receiving downlink packets, including + possible SLAAC-related IPv6 packets. + + The type of PDN connection established between the UE and the PDN-GW + can be any of the types described in the previous section. The dual- + stack PDN connection, i.e., the one that supports both IPv4 and IPv6 + packets, is the default connection that will be established if no + specific PDN connection type is specified by the UE in Release-8 + networks. + + Note 1: The UE receives the PDN Address Information Element + [TS.24301] at the end of radio bearer setup messaging. This + information element contains only the Interface Identifier of the + IPv6 address. In the case of the GPRS, the PDP Address + Information Element [TS.24008] would contain a complete IPv6 + address. However, the UE must ignore the IPv6 prefix if it + receives one in the message (see Section 11.2.1.3.2a of + [TS.29061]). + +6.4. Mobility of 3GPP IPv4v6 Bearers + + 3GPP discussed at length various approaches to support mobility + between a Release-8 LTE network and a pre-Release-9 2G/3G network + without an S4-SGSN for the new dual-stack bearers. The chosen + approach for mobility is as follows, in short: if a UE is allowed to + do handovers between a Release-8 LTE network and a pre-Release-9 + 2G/3G network without an S4-SGSN while having open PDN connections, + only single-stack bearers are used. Essentially, this indicates the + following deployment options: + + 1. If a network knows a UE may do handovers between a Release-8 LTE + network and a pre-Release-9 2G/3G network without an S4-SGSN, + then the network is configured to provide only single-stack + bearers, even if the UE requests dual-stack bearers. + + 2. If the network knows the UE does handovers only between a + Release-8 LTE network and a Release-9 2G/3G network or a + pre-Release-9 network with an S4-SGSN, then the network is + configured to provide the UE with dual-stack bearers on request. + The same also applies for LTE-only deployments. + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 23] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + When a network operator and their roaming partners have upgraded + their networks to Release-8, it is possible to use the new IPv4v6 + dual-stack bearers. A Release-8 UE always requests a dual-stack + bearer, but accepts what is assigned by the network. + +7. Dual-Stack Approach to IPv6 Transition in 3GPP Networks + + 3GPP networks can natively transport IPv4 and IPv6 packets between + the UE and the gateway (GGSN or PDN-GW) as a result of establishing + either a dual-stack PDP context or parallel IPv4 and IPv6 PDP + contexts. + + Current deployments of 3GPP networks primarily support IPv4 only. + These networks can be upgraded to also support IPv6 PDP contexts. By + doing so, devices and applications that are IPv6 capable can start + utilizing IPv6 connectivity. This will also ensure that legacy + devices and applications continue to work with no impact. As newer + devices start using IPv6 connectivity, the demand for actively used + IPv4 connections is expected to slowly decrease, helping operators + with a transition to IPv6. With a dual-stack approach, there is + always the potential to fall back to IPv4. A device that may be + roaming in a network wherein IPv6 is not supported by the visited + network could fall back to using IPv4 PDP contexts, and hence the end + user would at least get some connectivity. Unfortunately, the dual- + stack approach as such does not lower the number of used IPv4 + addresses. Every dual-stack bearer still needs to be given an IPv4 + address, private or public. This is a major concern with dual-stack + bearers concerning IPv6 transition. However, if the majority of + active IP communication has moved over to IPv6, then in the case of + Network Address Translation from IPv4 to IPv4 (NAT44), the number of + active NAT44-translated IPv4 connections can still be expected to + gradually decrease and thus give some level of relief regarding NAT44 + function scalability. + + As the networks evolve to support Release-8 EPS architecture and the + dual-stack PDP contexts, newer devices will be able to leverage such + capability and have a single bearer that supports both IPv4 and IPv6. + Since IPv4 and IPv6 packets are carried as payload within GTP between + the MS and the gateway (GGSN/PDN-GW), the transport-network + capability in terms of whether it supports IPv4 or IPv6 on the + interfaces between the eNodeB and SGW or between the SGW and PDN-GW + is immaterial. + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 24] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +8. Deployment Issues + +8.1. Overlapping IPv4 Addresses + + Given the shortage of globally routable public IPv4 addresses, + operators tend to assign private IPv4 addresses [RFC1918] to UEs when + they establish an IPv4-only PDP context or an IPv4v6 PDN context. + About 16 million UEs can be assigned a private IPv4 address that is + unique within a domain. However, for many operators, the number of + subscribers is greater than 16 million. The issue can be dealt with + by assigning overlapping RFC 1918 IPv4 addresses to UEs. As a + result, the IPv4 address assigned to a UE within the context of a + single operator realm would no longer be unique. This has the + obvious and known issues of NATed IP connections in the Internet. + Direct UE-to-UE connectivity becomes complicated; unless the UEs are + within the same private address range pool and/or anchored to the + same gateway, referrals using IP addresses will have issues, and so + forth. These are generic issues and not only a concern of the EPS. + However, 3GPP as such does not have any mandatory language concerning + NAT44 functionality in the EPC. Obvious deployment choices apply + also to the EPC: + + 1. Very large network deployments are partitioned, for example, + based on geographical areas. This partitioning allows + overlapping IPv4 address ranges to be assigned to UEs that are in + different areas. Each area has its own pool of gateways that are + dedicated to a certain overlapping IPv4 address range (also + referred to as a zone). Standard NAT44 functionality allows for + communication from the [RFC1918] private zone to the Internet. + Communication between zones requires special arrangement, such as + using intermediate gateways (e.g., a Back-to-Back User Agent + (B2BUA) in the case of SIP). + + 2. A UE attaches to a gateway as part of the Attach process. The + number of UEs that a gateway supports is on the order of 1 to 10 + million. Hence, all of the UEs assigned to a single gateway can + be assigned private IPv4 addresses. Operators with large + subscriber bases have multiple gateways, and hence the same + [RFC1918] IPv4 address space can be reused across gateways. The + IPv4 address assigned to a UE is unique within the scope of a + single gateway. + + 3. New services requiring direct connectivity between UEs should be + built on IPv6. Possible existing IPv4-only services and + applications requiring direct connectivity can be ported to IPv6. + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 25] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +8.2. IPv6 for Transport + + The various reference points of the 3GPP architecture, such as S1-U, + S5, and S8, are based on either GTP or PMIPv6. The underlying + transport for these reference points can be IPv4 or IPv6. GTP has + been able to operate over IPv6 transport (optionally) since R99, and + PMIPv6 has supported IPv6 transport since its introduction in + Release-8. The user-plane traffic between the UE and the gateway can + use either IPv4 or IPv6. These packets are essentially treated as + payload by GTP/PMIPv6 and transported accordingly, with no real + attention paid (at least from a routing perspective) to the + information contained in the IPv4 or IPv6 headers. The transport + links between the eNodeB and the SGW, and the link between the SGW + and PDN-GW, can be migrated to IPv6 without any direct implications + to the architecture. + + Currently, the inter-operator (for 3GPP technology) roaming networks + are all IPv4 only (see Inter-PLMN Backbone Guidelines [GSMA.IR.34]). + Eventually, these roaming networks will also get migrated to IPv6, if + there is a business reason for that. The migration period can be + prolonged considerably, because the 3GPP protocols always tunnel + user-plane traffic in the core network, and as described earlier, the + transport-network IP version is not in any way tied to the user-plane + IP version. Furthermore, the design of the inter-operator roaming + networks is such that the user-plane and transport-network IP + addressing schemes are completely separated from each other. The + inter-operator roaming network itself is also completely separated + from the Internet. Only those core network nodes that must be + connected to the inter-operator roaming networks are actually visible + there, and are able to send and receive (tunneled) traffic within the + inter-operator roaming networks. Obviously, in order for the roaming + to work properly, the operators have to agree on supported protocol + versions so that the visited network does not, for example, + unnecessarily drop user-plane IPv6 traffic. + +8.3. Operational Aspects of Running Dual-Stack Networks + + Operating dual-stack networks does imply cost and complexity to a + certain extent. However, these factors are mitigated by the + assurance that legacy devices and services are unaffected, and there + is always a fallback to IPv4 in case of issues with the IPv6 + deployment or network elements. The model also enables operators to + develop operational experience and expertise in an incremental + manner. + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 26] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + Running dual-stack networks requires the management of multiple IP + address spaces. Tracking of UEs needs to be expanded, since it can + be identified by either an IPv4 address or an IPv6 prefix. Network + elements will also need to be dual-stack capable in order to support + the dual-stack deployment model. + + Deployment and migration cases (see Section 6.1) for providing dual- + stack capability may mean doubled resource usage in an operator's + network. This is a major concern against providing dual-stack + connectivity using techniques discussed in Section 6.1. Also, + handovers between networks with different capabilities in terms of + whether or not networks are capable of dual-stack service may prove + difficult for users to comprehend and for applications/services to + cope with. These facts may add other than just technical concerns + for operators when planning to roll out dual-stack service offerings. + +8.4. Operational Aspects of Running a Network with IPv6-Only Bearers + + It is possible to allocate IPv6-only bearers to UEs in 3GPP networks. + The IPv6-only bearer has been part of the 3GPP specification since + the beginning. In 3GPP Release-8 (and later), it was defined that a + dual-stack UE (or when the radio equipment has no knowledge of the UE + IP stack's capabilities) must first attempt to establish a dual-stack + bearer and then possibly fall back to a single-stack bearer. A + Release-8 (or later) UE with an IPv6-only stack can directly attempt + to establish an IPv6-only bearer. The IPv6-only behavior is up to + subscription provisioning or PDN-GW configuration, and the fallback + scenarios do not necessarily cause additional signaling. + + Although the bullets below introduce IPv6-to-IPv4 address translation + and specifically discuss NAT64 technology [RFC6144], the current 3GPP + Release-8 architecture does not describe the use of address + translation or NAT64. It is up to a specific deployment whether + address translation is part of the network or not. The following are + some operational aspects to consider for running a network with + IPv6-only bearers: + + o The UE must have an IPv6-capable stack and a radio interface + capable of establishing an IPv6 PDP context or PDN connection. + + o The GGSN/PDN-GW must be IPv6 capable in order to support IPv6 + bearers. Furthermore, the SGSN/MME must allow the creation of a + PDP Type or PDN Type of IPv6. + + o Many of the common applications are IP version agnostic and hence + would work using an IPv6 bearer. However, applications that are + IPv4 specific would not work. + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 27] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + o Inter-operator roaming is another aspect that causes issues, at + least during the ramp-up phase of the IPv6 deployment. If the + visited network to which outbound roamers attach does not support + PDP/PDN Type IPv6, then there needs to be a fallback option. The + fallback option in this specific case is mostly up to the UE to + implement. Several cases are discussed in the following sections. + + o If and when a UE using an IPv6-only bearer needs access to the + IPv4 Internet/network, some type of translation from IPv6 to IPv4 + has to be deployed in the network. NAT64 (or DNS64) is one + solution that can be used for this purpose and works for a certain + set of protocols (read TCP, UDP, and ICMP, and when applications + actually use DNS for resolving names to IP addresses). + +8.5. Restricting Outbound IPv6 Roaming + + Roaming was briefly touched upon in Sections 8.2 and 8.4. While + there is interest in offering roaming service for IPv6-enabled UEs + and subscriptions, not all visited networks are prepared for IPv6 + outbound roamers: + + o The visited-network SGSN does not support the IPv6 PDP context or + IPv4v6 PDP context types. These should mostly concern + pre-Release-9 2G/3G networks without an S4-SGSN, but there is no + definitive rule, as the deployed feature sets vary depending on + implementations and licenses. + + o The visited network might not be commercially ready for IPv6 + outbound roamers, while everything might work technically at the + user-plane level. This would lead to "revenue leakage", + especially from the visited operator's point of view (note that + the use of a visited-network GGSN/PDN-GW does not really exist + today in commercial deployments for data roaming). + + It might be in the interest of operators to prohibit roaming + selectively within specific visited networks until IPv6 roaming is in + place. 3GPP does not specify a mechanism whereby IPv6 roaming is + prohibited without also disabling IPv4 access and other packet + services. The following options for disabling IPv6 access for + roaming subscribers could be available in some network deployments: + + o Policy and Charging Control (PCC) [TS.23203] functionality and its + rules, for example, could be used to cause bearer authorization to + fail when a desired criteria is met. In this case, that would be + PDN/PDP Type IPv6/IPv4v6 and a specific visited network. The + rules can be provisioned either in the home network or locally in + the visited network. + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 28] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + o Some Home Location Register (HLR) and Home Subscriber Server (HSS) + subscriber databases allow prohibiting roaming in a specific + (visited) network for a specified PDN/PDP Type. + + The obvious problems are that these solutions are not mandatory, are + not unified across networks, and therefore also lack a well-specified + fallback mechanism from the UE's point of view. + +8.6. Inter-RAT Handovers and IP Versions + + It is obvious that as operators start to incrementally deploy the EPS + along with the existing UTRAN/GERAN, handovers between different + radio technologies (inter-RAT handovers) become inevitable. In the + case of inter-RAT handovers, 3GPP supports the following IP + addressing scenarios: + + o The E-UTRAN IPv4v6 bearer has to map one to one to the UTRAN/GERAN + IPv4v6 bearer. + + o The E-UTRAN IPv6 bearer has to map one to one to the UTRAN/GERAN + IPv6 bearer. + + o The E-UTRAN IPv4 bearer has to map one to one to the UTRAN/GERAN + IPv4 bearer. + + Other types of configurations are not standardized. The above rules + essentially imply that the network migration has to be planned and + subscriptions provisioned based on the lowest common denominator, if + inter-RAT handovers are desired. For example, if some part of the + UTRAN cannot serve anything but IPv4 bearers, then the E-UTRAN is + also forced to provide only IPv4 bearers. Various combinations of + subscriber provisioning regarding IP versions are discussed further + in Section 8.7. + +8.7. Provisioning of IPv6 Subscribers and Various Combinations during + Initial Network Attachment + + Subscribers' provisioned PDP/PDN Types have multiple configurations. + The supported PDP/PDN Type is provisioned per each APN for every + subscriber. The following PDN Types are possible in the HSS for a + Release-8 subscription [TS.23401]: + + o IPv4v6 PDN Type (note that the IPv4v6 PDP Type does not exist in + an HLR and Mobile Application Part (MAP) [TS.29002] signaling + prior to Release-9). + + o IPv6-only PDN Type. + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 29] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + o IPv4-only PDN Type. + + o IPv4_or_IPv6 PDN Type (note that the IPv4_or_IPv6 PDP Type does + not exist in an HLR or MAP signaling. However, an HLR may have + multiple APN configurations of different PDN Types; these + configurations would effectively achieve the same functionality). + + A Release-8 dual-stack UE must always attempt to establish a PDP/PDN + Type IPv4v6 bearer. The same also applies when the modem part of the + UE does not have exact knowledge of whether the UE operating system + IP stack is dual-stack capable or not. A UE that is IPv6-only + capable must attempt to establish a PDP/PDN Type IPv6 bearer. Last, + a UE that is IPv4-only capable must attempt to establish a PDN/PDP + Type IPv4 bearer. + + In a case where the PDP/PDN Type requested by a UE does not match + what has been provisioned for the subscriber in the HSS (or HLR), the + UE possibly falls back to a different PDP/PDN Type. The network + (i.e., the MME or the S4-SGSN) is able to inform the UE during + network attachment signaling as to why it did not get the requested + PDP/PDN Type. These response/cause codes are documented in + [TS.24008] for requested PDP Types and [TS.24301] for requested PDN + Types: + + o (E)SM cause #50 "PDN/PDP type IPv4 only allowed". + + o (E)SM cause #51 "PDN/PDP type IPv6 only allowed". + + o (E)SM cause #52 "single address bearers only allowed". + + The above response/cause codes apply to Release-8 and onwards. In + pre-Release-8 networks, the response/cause codes that are used vary, + depending on the vendor, unfortunately. + + Possible fallback cases when the network deploys MMEs and/or S4-SGSNs + include (as documented in [TS.23401]): + + o Requested and provisioned PDP/PDN Types match => requested. + + o Requested IPv4v6 and provisioned IPv6 => IPv6, and a UE receives + an indication that an IPv6-only bearer is allowed. + + o Requested IPv4v6 and provisioned IPv4 => IPv4, and the UE receives + an indication that an IPv4-only bearer is allowed. + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 30] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + o Requested IPv4v6 and provisioned IPv4_or_IPv6 => IPv4 or IPv6 is + selected by the MME/S4-SGSN based on an unspecified criteria. The + UE may then attempt to establish, based on the UE implementation, + a parallel bearer of a different PDP/PDN Type. + + o Other combinations cause the bearer establishment to fail. + + In addition to PDP/PDN Types provisioned in the HSS, it is also + possible for a PDN-GW (and an MME/S4-SGSN) to affect the final + selected PDP/PDN Type: + + o Requested IPv4v6 and configured IPv4 or IPv6 in the PDN-GW => IPv4 + or IPv6. If the MME operator had included the "Dual Address + Bearer" flag in the bearer establishment signaling, then the UE + would have received an indication that an IPv6-only or IPv4-only + bearer is allowed. + + o Requested IPv4v6 and configured IPv4 or IPv6 in the PDN-GW => IPv4 + or IPv6. If the MME operator had not included the "Dual Address + Bearer" flag in the bearer establishment signaling, then the UE + may have attempted to establish, based on the UE implementation, a + parallel bearer of a different PDP/PDN Type. + + An SGSN that does not understand the requested PDP Type is supposed + to handle the requested PDP Type as IPv4. If for some reason an MME + does not understand the requested PDN Type, then the PDN Type is + handled as IPv6. + +9. Security Considerations + + This document does not introduce any security-related concerns. + Section 5 of [RFC3316] already contains an in-depth discussion of + IPv6-related security considerations in 3GPP networks prior to + Release-8. This section discusses a few additional security concerns + to take into consideration. + + In 3GPP access, the UE and the network always perform a mutual + authentication during the network attachment [TS.33102] [TS.33401]. + Furthermore, each time a PDP context/PDN connection gets created, a + new connection, a modification of an existing connection, and an + assignment of an IPv6 prefix or an IP address can be authorized + against the PCC infrastructure [TS.23203] and/or PDN's AAA server. + + The wireless part of the 3GPP link between the UE and the (e)NodeB as + well as the signaling messages between the UE and the MME/SGSN can be + protected, depending on the regional regulation and the operator's + deployment policy. User-plane traffic can be confidentiality + protected. The control plane is always at least integrity and replay + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 31] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + protected, and may also be confidentiality protected. The protection + within the transmission part of the network depends on the operator's + deployment policy [TS.33401]. + + Several of the on-link and neighbor-discovery-related attacks can be + mitigated due to the nature of the 3GPP point-to-point link model, + and the fact that the UE and the first-hop router (PDN-GW/GGSN or + SGW) are the only nodes on the link. For off-link IPv6 attacks, the + 3GPP EPS is as vulnerable as any IPv6 system. + + There have also been concerns that the UE IP stack might use + permanent subscriber identities, such as an International Mobile + Subscriber Identity (IMSI), as the source for the IPv6 address + Interface Identifier. This would be a privacy threat and would allow + tracking of subscribers. Therefore, the use of an IMSI (or any + identity defined by [TS.23003]) as the Interface Identifier is + prohibited [TS.23401]. However, there is no standardized method to + block such misbehaving UEs. + +10. Summary and Conclusions + + The 3GPP network architecture and specifications enable the + establishment of IPv4 and IPv6 connections through the use of + appropriate PDP context types. The current generation of deployed + networks can support dual-stack connectivity if the packet core + network elements, such as the SGSN and GGSN, have that capability. + With Release-8, 3GPP has specified a more optimal PDP context type + that enables the transport of IPv4 and IPv6 packets within a single + PDP context between the UE and the gateway. + + As devices and applications are upgraded to support IPv6, they can + start leveraging the IPv6 connectivity provided by the networks while + maintaining the ability to fall back to IPv4. Enabling IPv6 + connectivity in the 3GPP networks by itself will provide some degree + of relief to the IPv4 address space, as many of the applications and + services can start to work over IPv6. However, without comprehensive + testing of current widely used applications and solutions for their + ability to operate over IPv6 PDN connections, an IPv6-only access + would cause disruptions. + +11. Acknowledgements + + The authors thank Shabnam Sultana, Sri Gundavelli, Hui Deng, + Zhenqiang Li, Mikael Abrahamsson, James Woodyatt, Wes George, Martin + Thomson, Russ Mundy, Cameron Byrne, Ales Vizdal, Frank Brockners, + Adrian Farrel, Stephen Farrell, Paco Cortes, and Jari Arkko for their + reviews and comments on this document. + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 32] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + +12. Informative References + + [GSMA.IR.34] GSMA, "Inter-PLMN Backbone Guidelines", GSMA + PRD IR.34.4.9, March 2010. + + [PD-EXCLUDE] Korhonen, J., Ed., Savolainen, T., Krishnan, S., and O. + Troan, "Prefix Exclude Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix + Delegation", Work in Progress, December 2011. + + [RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., de Groot, + G., and E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private + Internets", BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996. + + [RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", + RFC 2131, March 1997. + + [RFC3315] Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., + Perkins, C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration + Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003. + + [RFC3316] Arkko, J., Kuijpers, G., Soliman, H., Loughney, J., and + J. Wiljakka, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) for + Some Second and Third Generation Cellular Hosts", + RFC 3316, April 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. + + [RFC4389] Thaler, D., Talwar, M., and C. Patel, "Neighbor + Discovery Proxies (ND Proxy)", RFC 4389, April 2006. + + [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. + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 33] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + [RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Ed., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., + Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", + RFC 5213, August 2008. + + [RFC6144] Baker, F., Li, X., Bao, C., and K. Yin, "Framework for + IPv4/IPv6 Translation", RFC 6144, April 2011. + + [TR.23975] 3GPP, "IPv6 Migration Guidelines", 3GPP + TR 23.975 11.0.0, June 2011. + + [TS.23003] 3GPP, "Numbering, addressing and identification", 3GPP + TS 23.003 10.3.0, September 2011. + + [TS.23060] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service + description; Stage 2", 3GPP TS 23.060 8.14.0, + September 2011. + + [TS.23203] 3GPP, "Policy and charging control architecture", 3GPP + TS 23.203 8.12.0, June 2011. + + [TS.23401] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements + for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network + (E-UTRAN) access", 3GPP TS 23.401 10.5.0, + September 2011. + + [TS.23402] 3GPP, "Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP + accesses", 3GPP TS 23.402 10.5.0, September 2011. + + [TS.24008] 3GPP, "Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification; + Core network protocols; Stage 3", 3GPP + TS 24.008 8.14.0, June 2011. + + [TS.24301] 3GPP, "Non-Access-Stratum (NAS) protocol for Evolved + Packet System (EPS); Stage 3", 3GPP TS 24.301 8.10.0, + June 2011. + + [TS.29002] 3GPP, "Mobile Application Part (MAP) specification", + 3GPP TS 29.002 9.6.0, September 2011. + + [TS.29060] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS + Tunnelling Protocol (GTP) across the Gn and Gp + interface", 3GPP TS 29.060 8.15.0, September 2011. + + [TS.29061] 3GPP, "Interworking between the Public Land Mobile + Network (PLMN) supporting packet based services and + Packet Data Networks (PDN)", 3GPP TS 29.061 8.8.0, + September 2011. + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 34] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + [TS.29274] 3GPP, "3GPP Evolved Packet System (EPS); Evolved + General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Tunnelling + Protocol for Control plane (GTPv2-C); Stage 3", 3GPP + TS 29.274 8.10.0, June 2011. + + [TS.29281] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio System (GPRS) Tunnelling + Protocol User Plane (GTPv1-U)", 3GPP TS 29.281 10.3.0, + September 2011. + + [TS.33102] 3GPP, "3G security; Security architecture", 3GPP + TS 33.102 10.0.0, December 2010. + + [TS.33401] 3GPP, "3GPP System Architecture Evolution (SAE); + Security architecture", 3GPP TS 33.401 10.2.0, + September 2011. + +Authors' Addresses + + Jouni Korhonen (editor) + Nokia Siemens Networks + Linnoitustie 6 + FI-02600 Espoo + FINLAND + + EMail: jouni.nospam@gmail.com + + + Jonne Soininen + Renesas Mobile + Porkkalankatu 24 + FI-00180 Helsinki + FINLAND + + EMail: jonne.soininen@renesasmobile.com + + + Basavaraj Patil + Nokia + 6021 Connection Drive + Irving, TX 75039 + USA + + EMail: basavaraj.patil@nokia.com + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 35] + +RFC 6459 IPv6 in 3GPP EPS January 2012 + + + Teemu Savolainen + Nokia + Hermiankatu 12 D + FI-33720 Tampere + FINLAND + + EMail: teemu.savolainen@nokia.com + + + Gabor Bajko + Nokia + 323 Fairchild Drive 6 + Mountain View, CA 94043 + USA + + EMail: gabor.bajko@nokia.com + + + Kaisu Iisakkila + Renesas Mobile + Porkkalankatu 24 + FI-00180 Helsinki + FINLAND + + EMail: kaisu.iisakkila@renesasmobile.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Korhonen, et al. Informational [Page 36] + |