--- 1/draft-ietf-v6ops-802-16-deployment-scenarios-04.txt 2007-12-18 22:12:18.000000000 +0100 +++ 2/draft-ietf-v6ops-802-16-deployment-scenarios-05.txt 2007-12-18 22:12:18.000000000 +0100 @@ -1,23 +1,23 @@ Network Working Group M-K. Shin, Ed. Internet-Draft ETRI -Expires: October 29, 2007 Y-H. Han +Expires: June 20, 2008 Y-H. Han KUT S-E. Kim KT D. Premec Siemens Mobile - April 27, 2007 + December 18, 2007 IPv6 Deployment Scenarios in 802.16 Networks - draft-ietf-v6ops-802-16-deployment-scenarios-04 + draft-ietf-v6ops-802-16-deployment-scenarios-05 Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that @@ -28,21 +28,21 @@ and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. - This Internet-Draft will expire on October 29, 2007. + This Internet-Draft will expire on June 20, 2008. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Abstract This document provides a detailed description of IPv6 deployment and integration methods and scenarios in wireless broadband access networks in coexistence with deployed IPv4 services. In this @@ -63,22 +63,22 @@ 2.3. IPv6 Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.4. IPv6 QoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.5. IPv6 Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.6. IPv6 Network Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 21 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 20 1. Introduction As the deployment of IEEE 802.16 access networks progresses, users will be connected to IPv6 networks. While the IEEE 802.16 standard defines the encapsulation of an IPv4/IPv6 datagram in an IEEE 802.16 MAC payload, a complete description of IPv4/IPv6 operation and deployment is not present. The IEEE 802.16 standards are limited to L1 and L2, so they may be used within any number of IP network architectures and scenarios. In this document, we will discuss main @@ -103,38 +103,38 @@ connectivity, management, and control between the subscriber station and the 802.16 networks. o Access Router (AR): An entity that performs an IP routing function to provide IP connectivity for subscriber station (SS or MS). o Connection Identifier (CID): A 16-bit value that identifies a connection to equivalent peers in the 802.16 MAC of the SS(MS) and BS. - o Ethernet CS: It means 802.3/Ethernet CS specific part of the - Packet CS defined in 802.16 STD. + o Ethernet CS (Convergence Sublayer): 802.3/Ethernet CS specific + part of the Packet CS defined in 802.16 STD. - o IPv6 CS: It means IPv6 specific subpart of the Packet CS, - Classifier 2 (Packet, IPv6) defined in 802.16 STD. + o IPv6 CS (Convergence Sublayer): IPv6 specific subpart of the + Packet CS, Classifier 2 (Packet, IPv6) defined in 802.16 STD. 2. Deploying IPv6 in IEEE 802.16 Networks 2.1. Elements of IEEE 802.16 Networks The mechanism of transporting IP traffic over IEEE 802.16 networks is outlined in [IEEE802.16]. [IEEE802.16] only specifies the convergence sublayers and the ability to transport IP over the air interface. The details of IPv6 (and IPv4) operations over IEEE 802.16 are being discussed now in the 16ng WG. - Here are some of the key elements of an IEEE 802.16 network. Figure - 1 illustrates the key elements of typical mobile 802.16 deployments. + Figure 1 illustrates the key elements of typical mobile 802.16 + deployments. Customer | Access Provider | Service Provider Premise | | (Backend Network) +-----+ +----+ +----+ +--------+ | SSs |--(802.16)--| BS |-----| | | Edge | ISP +-----+ +----+ | AR |---| Router |==>Network +--| | | (ER) | | +----+ +--------+ +-----+ +----+ | | +------+ @@ -155,40 +155,43 @@ There are two different deployment scenarios: fixed and mobile access deployment scenarios. A fixed access scenario substitutes for existing wired-based access technologies such as digital subscriber lines (xDSL) and cable networks. This fixed access scenario can provide nomadic access within the radio coverages, which is called Hot-zone model. A mobile access scenario exists for the new paradigm of transmitting voice, data and video over mobile networks. This scenario can provide high speed data rates equivalent to the wire- based Internet as well as mobility functions equivalent to cellular - systems. The mobile access scenario can be classified into two - different IPv6 link models: shared IPv6 prefix link model and point- - to-point link model. + systems. There are the different IPv6 impacts on convergence + sublayer type, link model, addressing, mobility, etc. between fixed + and mobile access deployment scenarios. The details will be + discussed below. The mobile access scenario can be classified into + two different IPv6 link models: shared IPv6 prefix link model and + point-to-point link model. 2.2.1. Mobile Access Deployment Scenarios Unlike IEEE 802.11, the IEEE 802.16 BS can provide mobility functions and fixed communications. [IEEE802.16e] has been standardized to provide mobility features on IEEE 802.16 environments. IEEE 802.16 BS might be deployed with a proprietary backend managed by an operator. Some architectural characteristics of IEEE 802.16 networks - may affect the detailed operations of NDP [RFC2461], [RFC2462]. + may affect the detailed operations of NDP (Neighbor Discovery + Protocol) [RFC4861], [RFC4862]. There are two possible IPv6 link models for mobile access deployment scenarios: shared IPv6 prefix link model and point-to-point link - model [I-D.ietf-16ng-ipv6-link-model-analysis]. There is always a - default access router in the scenarios. There can exist multiple - hosts behind an MS (networks behind an MS may exist). The mobile - access deployment models, Mobile WiMax and WiBro, fall within this - deployment model. + model [RFC4968]. There is always a default access router in the + scenarios. There can exist multiple hosts behind an MS (networks + behind an MS may exist). The mobile access deployment models, Mobile + WiMax and WiBro, fall within this deployment model. 1. Shared IPv6 Prefix Link Model This link model represents the IEEE 802.16 mobile access network deployment where a subnet consists of only single AR interfaces and multiple MSs. Therefore, all MSs and corresponding AR interfaces share the same IPv6 prefix as shown in Figure 2. The IPv6 prefix will be different from the interface of the AR. +-----+ @@ -271,25 +273,25 @@ 2.2.1.3. IPv6 Transport In an IPv6 subnet, there are always two underlying links: one is the IEEE 802.16 wireless link between the MS and BS, and the other is a wired link between the BS and AR. If stateless auto-configuration is used to get an IPv6 address, router discovery and DAD operation should be properly operated over IEEE 802.16 links. In case of the shared IPv6 prefix link model, the - DAD [RFC2461] does not adapt well to the 802.16 air interface as - there is no native multicast support. An optimization, called Relay - DAD, may be required to perform DAD. However, in case of the point- - to-point link model, DAD is easy since each connection to a MN is - treated as a unique IPv6 link. + DAD (Duplicate Address Detection) [RFC4861] does not adapt well to + the 802.16 air interface as there is no native multicast support. An + optimization, called Relay DAD, may be required to perform DAD. + However, in case of the point-to-point link model, DAD is easy since + each connection to a MN is treated as a unique IPv6 link. Note that in this scenario IPv6 CS [I-D.ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs] may be more appropriate than Ethernet CS [I-D.ietf-16ng-ip-over- ethernet-over-802.16] to transport IPv6 packets, since there is some overhead of Ethernet CS (e.g., Ethernet header) under mobile access environments. However, when PHS (Payload Header Suppression) is deployed it mitigates this overhead through the compression of packet headers. Simple or complex network equipment may constitute the underlying @@ -318,47 +320,46 @@ The ER runs the IGP such as OSPFv3 or IS-IS for IPv6 in the service provider network. The routing information of the ER can be redistributed to the AR. Prefix summarization should be done at the ER. 2.2.1.5. Mobility As for mobility management, the movement between BSs is handled by Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775], if it requires a subnet change. Also, in - certain cases (e.g., fast handover [I-D.ietf-mipshop-fmipv6- - rfc4068bis]) the link mobility information must be available for - facilitating the layer 3 handoff procedure. + certain cases (e.g., fast handover) the link mobility information + must be available for facilitating the layer 3 handoff procedure. Mobile IPv6 defines that movement detection uses Neighbor Unreachability Detection to detect when the default router is no longer bidirectionally reachable, in which case the mobile node must discover a new default router. Periodic Router Advertisements for reachability and movement detection may be unnecessary because the IEEE 802.16 MAC provides the reachability by its Ranging procedure and the movement detection by the Handoff procedure. IEEE 802.16 defines L2 triggers in case the refresh of an IP address is required during the handoff. Though a handoff has occurred, an additional router discovery procedure is not required in case of intra-subnet handoff. Also, faster handoff may occur by the L2 trigger in case of inter-subnet handoff. - Also, [IEEE802.16g] which is under-developed defines L2 triggers for - link status such as link-up, link-down, handoff-start. These L2 - triggers may make the Mobile IPv6 procedure more efficient and - faster. In addition, Mobile IPv6 Fast Handover assumes the support - from link- layer technology, but the particular link-layer - information being available, as well as the timing of its - availability (before, during or after a handover has occurred), - differs according to the particular link-layer technology in use. - This issue is also being discussed in [I-D.ietf-mipshop-fh80216e]. + Also, [IEEE802.16g] defines L2 triggers for link status such as + link-up, link-down, handoff-start. These L2 triggers may make the + Mobile IPv6 procedure more efficient and faster. In addition, Mobile + IPv6 Fast Handover assumes the support from link- layer technology, + but the particular link-layer information being available, as well as + the timing of its availability (before, during or after a handover + has occurred), differs according to the particular link-layer + technology in use. This issue is also being discussed in [I-D.ietf- + mipshop-fh80216e]. In addition, due to the problems caused by the existence of multiple convergence sublayers [RFC4840], the mobile access scenarios need solutions about how roaming will work when forced to move from one CS to another (e.g., IPv6 CS to Ethernet CS). Note that, at this phase this issue is the out of scope of this document. It should be also discussed in the 16ng WG. 2.2.2. Fixed/Nomadic Deployment Scenarios @@ -370,22 +371,22 @@ can use IEEE 802.16 to build up a mobile office. Wireless Internet spreading through a campus or a cafe can be also implemented with it. The distinct point of this use case is that it can use the unlicensed (2.4 & 5 GHz) band as well as the licensed (2.6 & 3.5GHz) band. By using the unlicensed band, an IEEE 802.16 BS might be used just as a wireless switch/hub which a user purchases to build a private wireless network in his/her home or laboratory. Under fixed access model, the IEEE 802.16 BS will be deployed using an IP backbone rather than a proprietary backend like cellular - systems. Thus, many IPv6 functionalities such as [RFC2461], - [RFC2462] will be preserved when adopting IPv6 to IEEE 802.16 + systems. Thus, many IPv6 functionalities such as [RFC4861], + [RFC4862] will be preserved when adopting IPv6 to IEEE 802.16 devices. +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ ISP 1 | SS1 |<-(16)+ +->| AR1 |----| ER1 |===>Network +-----+ | | +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ | | SS2 |<-(16)+-----| BS1 |--| +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ +-----+ ISP 2 +->| AR2 |----| ER2 |===>Network +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ +-----+ @@ -542,22 +543,21 @@ BS, IPv6 an address will be acquired by the MS through stateless autoconfiguration or DHCPv6. Note the initiation and authentication process is the same as used in IPv4. IPsec is a fundamental part of IPv6. Unlike IPv4, IPsec for IPv6 may be used within the global end-to-end architecture. But, we do not have PKIs across organizations and IPsec is not integrated with IEEE 802.16 network mobility management. IEEE 802.16 network threats may be different from IPv6 and IPv6 - transition threat models [I-D.ietf-v6ops-security-overview]. It - should be also discussed. + transition threat models [RFC4942]. It should be also discussed. 2.6. IPv6 Network Management [IEEE802.16f] includes the management information base for IEEE 802.16 networks. For IPv6 network management, the necessary instrumentation (such as MIBs, NetFlow Records, etc) should be available. Upon entering the network, an MS is assigned three management connections in each direction. These three connections reflect the @@ -593,88 +593,81 @@ of the document. Special thanks are due to Maximilian Riegel, Jonne Soininen, Brian E Carpenter, Jim Bound, David Johnston, Basavaraj Patil, Byoung-Jo Kim, Eric Klein, Bruno Sousa, Jung-Mo Moon, Sangjin Jeong, and Jinhyeock Choi for extensive review of this document. We acknowledge Dominik Kaspar for proofreading the document. 6. References 6.1. Normative References - [RFC2461] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., and W. Simpson, "Neighbor - Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, - December 1998. + [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, + "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, + September 2007. - [RFC2462] Thomson, S. and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless Address - Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462, December 1998. + [RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless + Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007. [RFC2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W., and B. Haberman, "Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October 1999. +6.2. Informative References + [RFC4779] Asadullah, S., Ahmed, A., Popoviciu, C., Savola, P., and J. Palet, "ISP IPv6 Deployment Scenarios in Broadband Access Networks", RFC 4779, January 2007. -6.2. Informative References + [RFC4968] Madanapalli, S., "Analysis of IPv6 Link Models for 802.16 + Based Networks", RFC 4968, August 2007. + + [RFC4942] Davies, E., Krishnan, S., and P. Savola, "IPv6 Transition/ + Co-existence Security Considerations", RFC 4942, + September 2007. [RFC2740] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., and J. Moy, "OSPF for IPv6", RFC 2740, December 1999. [RFC3314] Wasserman, M., "Recommendations for IPv6 in Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Standards", RFC 3314, September 2002. [RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004. [RFC4840] Aboba, B., Davies, E., and D. Thaler, "Multiple Encapsulation Methods Considered Harmful", RFC 4840, April 2007. [I-D.ietf-16ng-ps-goals] - Jee, J., "IP over 802.16 Problem Statement and Goals", - draft-ietf-16ng-ps-goals-01 (work in progress), - February 2007. - - [I-D.ietf-16ng-ipv6-link-model-analysis] - Madanapalli, S., "Analysis of IPv6 Link Models for 802.16 - based Networks", - draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-link-model-analysis-03 (work in - progress), February 2007. + Jee, J., Madanapalli, S., Mandin, J., and S. Park, "IP + over 802.16 Problem Statement and Goals", + draft-ietf-16ng-ps-goals-03 (work in progress), + November 2007. [I-D.ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs] - Patil, B., "IPv6 Over the IP Specific part of the Packet - Convergence sublayer in 802.16 Networks", - draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs-09 (work in progress), - April 2007. + Patil, B., Xia, F., Sarikaya, B., Choi, J., and S. + Madanapalli, "Transmission of IPv6 via the IPv6 CS over + IEEE 802.16 Networks", draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs-11 + (work in progress), November 2007. [I-D.ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16] Jeon, H., "Transmission of IP over Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 Networks", - draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-01 (work in - progress), March 2007. - - [I-D.ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis] - Koodli, R., "Fast Handovers for Mobile IPv6", - draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-01 (work in - progress), March 2007. + draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-03 (work in + progress), November 2007. [I-D.ietf-mipshop-fh80216e] - Jang, H., "Mobile IPv6 Fast Handovers over IEEE 802.16e - Networks", draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-01 (work in - progress), January 2007. - - [I-D.ietf-v6ops-security-overview] - Davies, E., "IPv6 Transition/Co-existence Security - Considerations", draft-ietf-v6ops-security-overview-06 - (work in progress), October 2006. + Jang, H., Jee, J., Han, Y., Park, S., and J. Cha, "Mobile + IPv6 Fast Handovers over IEEE 802.16e Networks", + draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-05 (work in progress), + November 2007. [IEEE802.16] "IEEE 802.16-2004, IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks, Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems", October 2004. [IEEE802.16e] "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed and Mobile Broadband Wireless Access Systems Amendment 2: Physical and Medium