draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat-02.txt		draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat-03.txt
	Internet Engineering Task Force M. Mawatari		Internet Engineering Task Force M. Mawatari
	Internet-Draft Japan Internet Exchange Co.,Ltd.		Internet-Draft Japan Internet Exchange Co.,Ltd.
	Intended status: BCP M. Kawashima		Intended status: BCP M. Kawashima
	Expires: October 19, 2012 NEC AccessTechnica, Ltd.		Expires: November 9, 2012 NEC AccessTechnica, Ltd.
	C. Byrne		C. Byrne
	T-Mobile USA		T-Mobile USA
	April 17, 2012		May 8, 2012
	464XLAT: Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation		464XLAT: Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation
	draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat-02		draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat-03
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document describes an architecture (464XLAT) for providing		This document describes an architecture (464XLAT) for providing
	limited IPv4 connectivity across an IPv6-only network by combining		limited IPv4 connectivity across an IPv6-only network by combining
	existing and well-known stateful protocol translation RFC 6146 in the		existing and well-known stateful protocol translation RFC 6146 in the
	core and stateless protocol translation RFC 6145 at the edge. 464XLAT		core and stateless protocol translation RFC 6145 at the edge. 464XLAT
	is a simple and scalable technique to quickly deploy limited IPv4		is a simple and scalable technique to quickly deploy limited IPv4
	access service to mobile and wireline IPv6-only edge networks without		access service to mobile and wireline IPv6-only edge networks without
	encapsulation.		encapsulation.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 39		skipping to change at page 1, line 39
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on October 19, 2012.		This Internet-Draft will expire on November 9, 2012.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 2, line 28		skipping to change at page 2, line 28
	5.2. Wireless 3GPP Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5.2. Wireless 3GPP Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6.1. Wireline Network Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6.1. Wireline Network Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6.2. Wireless 3GPP Network Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . 8		6.2. Wireless 3GPP Network Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		7. Implementation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	7.1. IPv6 Address Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		7.1. IPv6 Address Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	7.2. IPv4/IPv6 Address Translation Chart . . . . . . . . . . . 9		7.2. IPv4/IPv6 Address Translation Chart . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	7.3. Traffic Treatment Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		7.3. Traffic Treatment Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	7.4. DNS Proxy Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		7.4. DNS Proxy Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	7.5. IPv6 Prefix Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		7.5. IPv6 Prefix Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	7.6. CLAT in a Gateway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		7.6. Relationship between CLAT and NAT44 . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	7.7. CLAT to CLAT communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		7.7. CLAT in a Gateway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
			7.8. CLAT to CLAT communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	8. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		8. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The IANA unallocated IPv4 address pool was exhausted on February 3,		The IANA unallocated IPv4 address pool was exhausted on February 3,
	2011. Each RIR's unallocated IPv4 address pool will exhaust in the		2011. Each RIR's unallocated IPv4 address pool will exhaust in the
	near future. It will be difficult for many networks to assign IPv4		near future. It will be difficult for many networks to assign IPv4
	skipping to change at page 3, line 38		skipping to change at page 3, line 38
	the future case of IPv6-only servers and peers to be reached from		the future case of IPv6-only servers and peers to be reached from
	legacy IPv4-only hosts. The 464XLAT architecture encourages IPv6		legacy IPv4-only hosts. The 464XLAT architecture encourages IPv6
	transition by making IPv4 services reachable across IPv6-only		transition by making IPv4 services reachable across IPv6-only
	networks and providing IPv6 and IPv4 connectivity to single-stack		networks and providing IPv6 and IPv4 connectivity to single-stack
	IPv4 or IPv6 servers and peers.		IPv4 or IPv6 servers and peers.
	Running a single-stack IPv6-only network has several operational		Running a single-stack IPv6-only network has several operational
	benefits in terms of increasing scalability and decreasing		benefits in terms of increasing scalability and decreasing
	operational complexity. Unfortunately, there are important cases		operational complexity. Unfortunately, there are important cases
	where IPv6-only networks fail to meet subscriber expectations, as		where IPv6-only networks fail to meet subscriber expectations, as
	described in [I-D.arkko-ipv6-only-experience]. The 464XLAT overcomes		described in [RFC6586]. The 464XLAT overcomes the issues described
	the issues described in [I-D.arkko-ipv6-only-experience] to provide		in [RFC6586] to provide subscribers the full IPv6 and limited IPv4
	subscribers the full IPv6 and limited IPv4 functionality while		functionality while providing the network operator the benefits of a
	providing the network operator the benefits of a simple yet highly		simple yet highly scalable single-stack IPv6 network.
	scalable single-stack IPv6 network.
	2. Requirements Language		2. Requirements Language
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
	3. Terminology		3. Terminology
	PLAT: PLAT is Provider side translator(XLAT) that complies with		PLAT: PLAT is Provider side translator(XLAT) that complies with
	skipping to change at page 8, line 43		skipping to change at page 8, line 43
	additional IPv6 PDP network attachments since that does not solve the		additional IPv6 PDP network attachments since that does not solve the
	near-term IPv4 scarcity issues and it increases cost in most cases.		near-term IPv4 scarcity issues and it increases cost in most cases.
	The most logical path forward is to replace IPv4 with IPv6 and		The most logical path forward is to replace IPv4 with IPv6 and
	replace the common NAT44 with stateful translation [RFC6146] and		replace the common NAT44 with stateful translation [RFC6146] and
	DNS64 [RFC6147]. Extensive live network testing with hundreds of		DNS64 [RFC6147]. Extensive live network testing with hundreds of
	friendly-users has shown that IPv6-only network attachments for		friendly-users has shown that IPv6-only network attachments for
	mobile devices supports over 85% of the common applications on the		mobile devices supports over 85% of the common applications on the
	Android mobile operating systems. The remaining 15% of applications		Android mobile operating systems. The remaining 15% of applications
	do not work because the application requires an IPv4 socket or the		do not work because the application requires an IPv4 socket or the
	application does an IPv4-referral. These findings are consistent		application does an IPv4-referral. These findings are consistent
	with the mobile IPv6-only user experience in		with the mobile IPv6-only user experience in [RFC6586].
	[I-D.arkko-ipv6-only-experience].
	464XLAT in combination with stateful translation [RFC6146] and DNS64		464XLAT in combination with stateful translation [RFC6146] and DNS64
	[RFC6147] allows 85% of the Android applications to continue to work		[RFC6147] allows 85% of the Android applications to continue to work
	with single translation or native IPv6 access. For the remaining 15%		with single translation or native IPv6 access. For the remaining 15%
	of applications that require IPv4 connectivity, the CLAT function on		of applications that require IPv4 connectivity, the CLAT function on
	the UE provides a private IPv4 address and IPv4 default-route on the		the UE provides a private IPv4 address and IPv4 default-route on the
	host for the applications to reference and bind to. Connections		host for the applications to reference and bind to. Connections
	sourced from the IPv4 interface are immediately routed to the CLAT		sourced from the IPv4 interface are immediately routed to the CLAT
	function and passed to the IPv6-only mobile network, destine to the		function and passed to the IPv6-only mobile network, destine to the
	PLAT. In summary, the UE has the CLAT function that does a stateless		PLAT. In summary, the UE has the CLAT function that does a stateless
	skipping to change at page 11, line 20		skipping to change at page 11, line 20
	for each DNS lookup. The CLAT SHOULD set itself as the DNS server		for each DNS lookup. The CLAT SHOULD set itself as the DNS server
	via DHCP or other means and proxy DNS queries for IPv4 and IPv6		via DHCP or other means and proxy DNS queries for IPv4 and IPv6
	clients. Using the CLAT enabled home router or UE as a DNS proxy is		clients. Using the CLAT enabled home router or UE as a DNS proxy is
	a normal consume gateway function and simplifies the traffic flow so		a normal consume gateway function and simplifies the traffic flow so
	that only IPv6 native queries are made across the access network.		that only IPv6 native queries are made across the access network.
	The CLAT SHOULD allow for a client to query any DNS server of its		The CLAT SHOULD allow for a client to query any DNS server of its
	choice and bypass the proxy.		choice and bypass the proxy.
	7.5. IPv6 Prefix Handling		7.5. IPv6 Prefix Handling
	There are two approaches. In one of the cases, the CLAT will have a		From the delegated DHCPv6 [RFC3633] prefix, a /64 is dedicated to
	dedicated /64 via DHCPv6 prefix delegation [RFC3633] or other means		source and receive IPv6 packets associated with the stateless
	to source and receive IPv6 packets associated with the [RFC6145]		translation [RFC6145].
	stateless translation of IPv4 packets to the local clients. If the
	CLAT choose one /64 prefix for translation from delegated prefix,
	then it SHOULD NOT be used for anything else.
	In another cases where the access network does not allow for a		In another cases where the access network does not allow for a
	dedicated translation prefix, the CLAT will do NAT44 such that all		dedicated translation prefix, the CLAT will do NAT44 such that all
	private IPv4 sourced LAN packets appears from one private IPv4		private IPv4 sourced LAN packets appears from one private IPv4
	address which is statelessly translated to one IPv6 address.		address which is statelessly translated to one IPv6 address.
	The CLAT MAY discover the Pref64::/n of the PLAT via some method such		The CLAT MAY discover the Pref64::/n of the PLAT via some method such
	as DHCPv6 option, TR-069, DNS APL RR [RFC3123] or		as DHCPv6 option, TR-069, DNS APL RR [RFC3123] or
	[I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic].		[I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic].
	7.6. CLAT in a Gateway		7.6. Relationship between CLAT and NAT44
			If the CLAT does not have dedicated IPv6 prefix for translation, the
			CLAT does NAT44 as an internal function which never appears on the
			wire.
			Incoming source IPv4 packets from the LAN of [RFC1918] addresses are
			NAT44 to the CLAT host address on the LAN of one [RFC1918] address.
			Then, the CLAT will do a stateless translation [RFC6145] so that the
			IPv4 packets from one [RFC1918] address are translated to the CLAT
			LAN IPv6 address as described in [RFC6052].
			7.7. CLAT in a Gateway
	The CLAT is a stateless translation feature which can be implemented		The CLAT is a stateless translation feature which can be implemented
	in a common home router or mobile phone that has a mobile router		in a common home router or mobile phone that has a mobile router
	feature. The router with CLAT function SHOULD provide common router		feature. The router with CLAT function SHOULD provide common router
	services such as DHCP of [RFC1918] addresses, DHCPv6, and DNS		services such as DHCP of [RFC1918] addresses, DHCPv6, and DNS
	service. The router SHOULD set itself as the DNS server advertised		service. The router SHOULD set itself as the DNS server advertised
	via DHCP or other means to the clients so that it may implement the		via DHCP or other means to the clients so that it may implement the
	DNS proxy function to avoid double translation of DNS request.		DNS proxy function to avoid double translation of DNS request.
	7.7. CLAT to CLAT communications		7.8. CLAT to CLAT communications
	While CLAT to CLAT IPv4 communication may work when the client IPv4		While CLAT to CLAT IPv4 communication may work when the client IPv4
	subnets do not overlap, this traffic flow is out of scope. 464XLAT is		subnets do not overlap, this traffic flow is out of scope. 464XLAT is
	a hub and spoke architecture focused on enabling IPv4-only services		a hub and spoke architecture focused on enabling IPv4-only services
	over IPv6-only access networks.		over IPv6-only access networks.
	8. Deployment Considerations		8. Deployment Considerations
	Even if the Internet access provider for consumers is different from		Even if the Internet access provider for consumers is different from
	the PLAT provider (another Internet access provider or Internet		the PLAT provider (another Internet access provider or Internet
	skipping to change at page 13, line 6		skipping to change at page 13, line 14
	10. IANA Considerations		10. IANA Considerations
	This document has no actions for IANA.		This document has no actions for IANA.
	11. Acknowledgements		11. Acknowledgements
	The authors would like to thank JPIX NOC members, JPIX 464XLAT trial		The authors would like to thank JPIX NOC members, JPIX 464XLAT trial
	service members, Seiichi Kawamura, Dan Drown, Brian Carpenter, Rajiv		service members, Seiichi Kawamura, Dan Drown, Brian Carpenter, Rajiv
	Asati, Washam Fan, Behcet Sarikaya, Jan Zorz, Remi Despres, Tatsuya		Asati, Washam Fan, Behcet Sarikaya, Jan Zorz, Remi Despres, Tatsuya
	Oishi, Lorenzo Colitti, Erik Kline, and Ole Troan for their helpful		Oishi, Lorenzo Colitti, Erik Kline, Ole Troan, Maoke Chen, and Gang
	comments. We also would like to thank Fred Baker and Joel Jaeggli		Chen for their helpful comments. We also would like to thank Fred
	for their support.		Baker and Joel Jaeggli for their support.
	12. References		12. References
	12.1. Normative References		12.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	[RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X.		[RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X.
	Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052,		Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052,
	skipping to change at page 13, line 33		skipping to change at page 13, line 41
	[RFC6145] Li, X., Bao, C., and F. Baker, "IP/ICMP Translation		[RFC6145] Li, X., Bao, C., and F. Baker, "IP/ICMP Translation
	Algorithm", RFC 6145, April 2011.		Algorithm", RFC 6145, April 2011.
	[RFC6146] Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful		[RFC6146] Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful
	NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6		NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6
	Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011.		Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011.
	12.2. Informative References		12.2. Informative References
	[I-D.arkko-ipv6-only-experience]
	Arkko, J. and A. Keranen, "Experiences from an IPv6-Only
	Network", draft-arkko-ipv6-only-experience-05 (work in
	progress), February 2012.
	[I-D.hazeyama-widecamp-ipv6-only-experience]		[I-D.hazeyama-widecamp-ipv6-only-experience]
	Hazeyama, H., Hiromi, R., Ishihara, T., and O. Nakamura,		Hazeyama, H., Hiromi, R., Ishihara, T., and O. Nakamura,
	"Experiences from IPv6-Only Networks with Transition		"Experiences from IPv6-Only Networks with Transition
	Technologies in the WIDE Camp Spring 2012",		Technologies in the WIDE Camp Spring 2012",
	draft-hazeyama-widecamp-ipv6-only-experience-01 (work in		draft-hazeyama-widecamp-ipv6-only-experience-01 (work in
	progress), March 2012.		progress), March 2012.
	[I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic]		[I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic]
	Savolainen, T., Korhonen, J., and D. Wing, "Discovery of		Savolainen, T., Korhonen, J., and D. Wing, "Discovery of
	IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis",		IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis",
	skipping to change at page 15, line 5		skipping to change at page 14, line 46
	[RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-		[RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
	Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4		Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4
	Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011.		Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011.
	[RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, T.,		[RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, T.,
	Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation		Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation
	Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)",		Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)",
	RFC 6459, January 2012.		RFC 6459, January 2012.
			[RFC6586] Arkko, J. and A. Keranen, "Experiences from an IPv6-Only
			Network", RFC 6586, April 2012.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Masataka Mawatari		Masataka Mawatari
	Japan Internet Exchange Co.,Ltd.		Japan Internet Exchange Co.,Ltd.
	KDDI Otemachi Building 19F, 1-8-1 Otemachi,		KDDI Otemachi Building 19F, 1-8-1 Otemachi,
	Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0004		Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0004
	JAPAN		JAPAN
	Phone: +81 3 3243 9579		Phone: +81 3 3243 9579
	Email: mawatari@jpix.ad.jp		Email: mawatari@jpix.ad.jp
End of changes. 14 change blocks.
	31 lines changed or deleted		37 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/