| < draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-01.txt | draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-02.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DMM Working Group U. Chunduri, Ed. | DMM Working Group U. Chunduri, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft R. Li | Internet-Draft R. Li | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track Huawei USA | Intended status: Standards Track Huawei USA | |||
| Expires: January 17, 2019 J. Tantsura | Expires: April 19, 2019 J. Tantsura | |||
| Nuage Networks | Apstra, Inc. | |||
| L. Contreras | L. Contreras | |||
| Telefonica | Telefonica | |||
| X. De Foy | X. De Foy | |||
| InterDigital Communications, LLC | InterDigital Communications, LLC | |||
| July 16, 2018 | October 16, 2018 | |||
| Transport Network aware Mobility for 5G | Transport Network aware Mobility for 5G | |||
| draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-01 | draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-02 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document specifies a framework and a mapping function for 5G | This document specifies a framework and a mapping function for 5G | |||
| mobile user plane with transport network slicing, integrated with | mobile user plane with transport network slicing, integrated with | |||
| Mobile Radio Access and a Virtualized Core Network. The integrated | Mobile Radio Access and a Virtualized Core Network. The integrated | |||
| approach specified in a way to address all the mobility scenarios | approach specified in a way to address all the mobility scenarios | |||
| defined in [TS23.501] and to be backward compatible with LTE | defined in [TS23.501] and to be backward compatible with LTE | |||
| [TS.23.401-3GPP] network deployments. | [TS.23.401-3GPP] network deployments. | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 10 ¶ | |||
| 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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://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 January 17, 2019. | This Internet-Draft will expire on April 19, 2019. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2018 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 | |||
| (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://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 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 35 ¶ | |||
| described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction and Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction and Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.1. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.1. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.2. Solution Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 1.2. Solution Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2. Transport Network (TN) and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 . . 5 | 2. Transport Network (TN) and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 . . 5 | |||
| 2.1. Discrete Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.1. Discrete Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 2.2. Integrated Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.2. Integrated Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.3. Transport Network Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | ||||
| 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3.1. PPR with Transport Slicing aware Mobility on N3/N9 . . . 9 | 3.1. PPR with Transport Awareness for 5GS on N3/N9 Interfaces 10 | |||
| 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes . . . . . 11 | 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes . . . . . 12 | |||
| 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 3.4. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures . . . . . . . . . 11 | 3.4. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 3.4.1. SSC Mode1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3.4.1. SSC Mode1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 3.4.2. SSC Mode2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 3.4.2. SSC Mode2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3.4.3. SSC Mode3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 3.4.3. SSC Mode3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 5. New Control Plane and User Planes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 5. Summary and Benefits with PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 5.1. LISP and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 5.2. ILA and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6. Summary and Benefits with PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | Appendix A. Appendix: New Control Plane and User Planes . . . . 19 | |||
| 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | A.1. LISP and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | A.2. ILA and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 1. Introduction and Problem Statement | 1. Introduction and Problem Statement | |||
| 3GPP Release 15 for 5GC is defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP], | 3GPP Release 15 for 5GC is defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP], | |||
| [TS.23.502-3GPP], [TS.23.503-3GPP]. A new user plane interface N9 | [TS.23.502-3GPP], [TS.23.503-3GPP]. A new user plane interface N9 | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] has been created between 2 User Plane | [TS.23.501-3GPP] has been created between 2 User Plane | |||
| Functionalities (UPFs). While user plane for N9 interface being | Functionalities (UPFs). While user plane for N9 interface being | |||
| finalized for REL16, both GTP-U based encapsulation or any other | finalized for REL16, both GTP-U based encapsulation or any other | |||
| compatible approach is being considered [CT4SID]. Concerning to this | compatible approach is being considered [CT4SID]. Concerning to this | |||
| document another relevant interface is N3, which is between gNB and | document another relevant interface is N3, which is between gNB and | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 21 ¶ | |||
| network along with slicing requirements. TN with mobility awareness | network along with slicing requirements. TN with mobility awareness | |||
| described here in a way, which does not erase performance and latency | described here in a way, which does not erase performance and latency | |||
| gains made with 5G New Radio(5GNR) and virtualized cellular core | gains made with 5G New Radio(5GNR) and virtualized cellular core | |||
| network features developed in [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | network features developed in [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | |||
| Section 2 describes two methods, with which Transport Network (TN) | Section 2 describes two methods, with which Transport Network (TN) | |||
| aware mobility can be built irrespective of underlying TN technology | aware mobility can be built irrespective of underlying TN technology | |||
| used. Using Preferred Path Routing (PPR) as TN Underlay is detailed | used. Using Preferred Path Routing (PPR) as TN Underlay is detailed | |||
| in Section 3. Section 3.4 further describes the applicability and | in Section 3. Section 3.4 further describes the applicability and | |||
| procedures of the same with 5G SSC modes on N3 and N9 interfaces. At | procedures of the same with 5G SSC modes on N3 and N9 interfaces. At | |||
| the end, Section 6 recapitulates the benefits of specified approach | the end, Section 5 recapitulates the benefits of specified approach | |||
| in mobile networks. | in mobile networks. | |||
| 2. Transport Network (TN) and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 | 2. Transport Network (TN) and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 | |||
| Service Based Interfaces (SBI) | Service Based Interfaces (SBI) | |||
| ----+-----+-----+----+----+-----+----+--------+-----+----+------ | ----+-----+-----+----+----+-----+----+--------+-----+----+------ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| +---+---+ | +--+--+ | +--+---+ | +--+--+ +--+--+ | +-+--+ | +---+---+ | +--+--+ | +--+---+ | +--+--+ +--+--+ | +-+--+ | |||
| | NSSF | | | NRF | | | AUSF | | | UDM | | NEF | | | AF | | | NSSF | | | NRF | | | AUSF | | | UDM | | NEF | | | AF | | |||
| +-------+ | +-----+ | +------+ | +-----+ +-----+ | +----+ | +-------+ | +-----+ | +------+ | +-----+ +-----+ | +----+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 19 ¶ | |||
| Currently specified Control Plane (CP) functions Access and Mobility | Currently specified Control Plane (CP) functions Access and Mobility | |||
| Management Function (AMF), Session Management Function (SMF) and User | Management Function (AMF), Session Management Function (SMF) and User | |||
| plane (UP) components gNodeB (gNB), User Plane Function (UPF) with | plane (UP) components gNodeB (gNB), User Plane Function (UPF) with | |||
| N2, N3, N4, N6 and N9 are relevant to this document. Other | N2, N3, N4, N6 and N9 are relevant to this document. Other | |||
| Virtualized 5G control plane components NRF, AUSF, PCF, AUSF, UDM, | Virtualized 5G control plane components NRF, AUSF, PCF, AUSF, UDM, | |||
| NEF, and AF are not directly relevant for the discussion in this | NEF, and AF are not directly relevant for the discussion in this | |||
| document and one can see the functionalities of these in | document and one can see the functionalities of these in | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | |||
| N3 interface is similar to S1U in 4G/LTE [TS.23.401-3GPP] network and | From encapsulation perspective, N3 interface is similar to S1U in 4G/ | |||
| uses GTP-U [TS.29.281-3GPP] encapsulation to transport any UE PDUs | LTE [TS.23.401-3GPP] network and uses GTP-U [TS.29.281-3GPP] to | |||
| (IPv4, IPv6, IPv4v6, Ethernet or Unstructured). N9 interface is a | transport any UE PDUs (IPv4, IPv6, IPv4v6, Ethernet or Unstructured). | |||
| new interface to connect UPFs in SSC Mode3 Section 3.4.3 and right | Unlike S1U, N3 has some additional aspects as there is no bearer | |||
| concept and per no per bearer GTP-U tunnels. Instead, QoS | ||||
| information is carried in the PDU Session Container GTP-U extension | ||||
| header. N9 interface is a new interface to connect UPFs and right | ||||
| user plane protocol/encapsulation is being studied through 3GPP CT4 | user plane protocol/encapsulation is being studied through 3GPP CT4 | |||
| WG approved study item [CT4SID] for REL-16. | WG approved study item [CT4SID] for REL-16. | |||
| TN Aware Mobility with optimized transport network functionality is | TN Aware Mobility with optimized transport network functionality is | |||
| explained below. How PPR fits in this framework in detail along with | explained below. How PPR fits in this framework in detail along with | |||
| other various TE technologies briefly are in Section 3 and Section 4 | other various TE technologies briefly are in Section 3 and Section 4 | |||
| respectively. | respectively. | |||
| 2.1. Discrete Approach | 2.1. Discrete Approach | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 14 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 17 ¶ | |||
| not be part of the 5G Service Based Interface (SBI). Only management | not be part of the 5G Service Based Interface (SBI). Only management | |||
| plane functionality is needed to create, monitor, manage and delete | plane functionality is needed to create, monitor, manage and delete | |||
| (life cycle management) the transport TE paths/transport slices from | (life cycle management) the transport TE paths/transport slices from | |||
| gNB to UPF (on N3/N9 interfaces). This approach provide partial | gNB to UPF (on N3/N9 interfaces). This approach provide partial | |||
| integration of the transport network into 5GS with some benefits. | integration of the transport network into 5GS with some benefits. | |||
| One of the limitations of this approach is the inability of 5GS | One of the limitations of this approach is the inability of 5GS | |||
| procedures to know, if underlying transport resources are available | procedures to know, if underlying transport resources are available | |||
| for the traffic type being carried in PDU session before making | for the traffic type being carried in PDU session before making | |||
| certain decisions in the 5G CP. One example scenario/decision could | certain decisions in the 5G CP. One example scenario/decision could | |||
| be, a target gNB selection in Xn mobility in SSC Mode1, without | be, a target gNB selection in Xn mobility event, without knowing if | |||
| knowing if the target gNB is having a underlay transport slice | the target gNB is having a underlay transport slice resource for the | |||
| resource for the 5QI of the PDU session. The below approach can | 5QI of the PDU session. The below approach can mitigate this. | |||
| mitigate this. | ||||
| 2.2. Integrated Approach | 2.2. Integrated Approach | |||
| Network Slice Selection Function (NSSF) as defined in | Network Slice Selection Function (NSSF) as defined in | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] concerns with multiple aspects related to creation, | [TS.23.501-3GPP] concerns with multiple aspects including selecting a | |||
| selection, mobility, roaming and co-ordination among other CP | network slice instance when requested by AMF based on the requested | |||
| functions in 5GS. However, the scope is only in 5GC (both control | SNSSAI, current location of UE, roaming indication etc. It also | |||
| and user plane) and NG Radio Access network including N3IWF for non- | notifies NF service consumers (e.g AMF) whenever the status about the | |||
| 3GPP access. Slice functionality is per PDU session granularity. | slice availability changes. However, the scope is only in 5GC (both | |||
| While this fully covers needed functionality and resources from UE | control and user plane) and NG Radio Access network including N3IWF | |||
| for non-3GPP access. Slice functionality is per PDU session | ||||
| granularity, which covers needed functionality and resources from UE | ||||
| registration, Tracking Area (TA) updates, mobility and roaming, | registration, Tracking Area (TA) updates, mobility and roaming, | |||
| resources and functionalities needed from transport network is not | resources and functionalities needed from transport network is not | |||
| specified. This is seen as independent functionality though part of | specified. This is seen as independent functionality and currently | |||
| 5GS. If transport network is not factored in an integrated fashion | not part of 5GS. If transport network is not factored in an | |||
| w.r.t available resources (with network characteristics from desired | integrated fashion w.r.t available resources (with network | |||
| bandwidth, latency, burst size handling and optionally jitter) some | characteristics from desired bandwidth, latency, burst size handling | |||
| of the gains made with optimizations through 5GNR and 5GC can be | and optionally jitter) some of the gains made with optimizations | |||
| degraded. | through 5GNR and 5GC can be degraded. | |||
| To assuage the above situation, TNF is described (Figure 1) as part | To assuage the above situation, TNF is described (Figure 1) as part | |||
| of control plane. This has the view of the underlying transport | of control plane. This has the view of the underlying transport | |||
| network with all links and nodes as well as various possible underlay | network with all links and nodes as well as various possible underlay | |||
| paths with different characteristics. TNF can be seen as supporting | paths with different characteristics. TNF can be seen as supporting | |||
| PCE functionality [RFC5440] and optionally BGP-LS [RFC7752] to get | PCE functionality [RFC5440] and optionally BGP-LS [RFC7752] to get | |||
| the TE and topology information of the underlying IGP network. | the TE and topology information of the underlying IGP network. | |||
| A south bound interface Ns is shown which interacts with the gNB/CSR. | A south bound interface Ns is shown which interacts with the gNB/CSR. | |||
| 'Ns' can use one or more mechanism available today (PCEP [RFC5440], | 'Ns' can use one or more mechanism available today (PCEP [RFC5440], | |||
| NETCONF [RFC6241], RESTCONF [RFC8040] or gNMI) to provision the L2/L3 | NETCONF [RFC6241], RESTCONF [RFC8040] or gNMI) to provision the L2/L3 | |||
| VPNs along with TE underlay paths from gNB to UPF. | VPNs along with TE underlay paths from gNB to UPF. Ns and Nn | |||
| interfaces can be part of the integrated 3GPP architecture, but the | ||||
| specification/ownership of these interfaces SHOULD be left out of | ||||
| scope of 3GPP. | ||||
| These VPNs and/or underlay TE paths MUST be similar on all gNB/CSRs | These VPNs and/or underlay TE paths MUST be similar on all gNB/CSRs | |||
| and UPFs concerned to allow mobility of UEs while associated with one | and UPFs concerned to allow mobility of UEs while associated with one | |||
| of the Slice/Service Types (SSTs)as defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP]. A | of the Slice/Service Types (SSTs)as defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP]. A | |||
| north bound interface 'Nn' is shown from one or more of the transport | north bound interface 'Nn' is shown from one or more of the transport | |||
| network nodes (or ULCL/BP UPF, Anchor Point UPF) to TNF as shown in | network nodes (or ULCL/BP UPF, Anchor Point UPF) to TNF as shown in | |||
| Figure 1. It would enable learning the TE characteristics of all | Figure 1. It would enable learning the TE characteristics of all | |||
| links and nodes of the network continuously (through BGP-LS [RFC7752] | links and nodes of the network continuously (through BGP-LS [RFC7752] | |||
| or through a passive IGP adjacency and PCEP [RFC5440]). | or through a passive IGP adjacency and PCEP [RFC5440]). | |||
| With the TNF in 5GS Service Based Interface, the following additional | With the TNF in 5GS Service Based Interface, the following additional | |||
| functionalities are required for end-2-end slice management including | functionalities are required for end-2-end slice management including | |||
| the transport network: | the transport network: | |||
| o In the Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) PDU | o The Specific Network Slice Selection Assistance Information | |||
| session's assigned transport VPN and the TE path information is | (SNSSAI) of PDU session's SHOULD be mapped to the assigned | |||
| needed. | transport VPN and the TE path information for that slice. | |||
| o For transport slice assignment for various SSTs (eMBB, URLLC, | o For transport slice assignment for various SSTs (eMBB, URLLC, | |||
| MIoT) corresponding underlay paths need to be created and | MIoT) corresponding underlay paths need to be created and | |||
| monitored from each transport end point (gNB/CSR and UPF). | monitored from each transport end point (gNB/CSR and UPF). | |||
| o During PDU session creation, apart from radio and 5GC resources, | o During PDU session creation, apart from radio and 5GC resources, | |||
| transport network resources needed to be verified matching the | transport network resources needed to be verified matching the | |||
| characteristics of the PDU session traffic type. | characteristics of the PDU session traffic type. | |||
| o Mapping of PDU session parameters to underlay SST paths need to be | o Mapping of PDU session parameters to underlay SST paths need to be | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 45 ¶ | |||
| GTP-U header and map the same to the underlying transport path | GTP-U header and map the same to the underlying transport path | |||
| (including VPN or PW). This works for uplink (UL) direction. | (including VPN or PW). This works for uplink (UL) direction. | |||
| o For downlink direction RQI need to be considered to map the DL | o For downlink direction RQI need to be considered to map the DL | |||
| packet to one of the underlay paths at the UPF. | packet to one of the underlay paths at the UPF. | |||
| o If any other form of encapsulation (other than GTP-U) either on N3 | o If any other form of encapsulation (other than GTP-U) either on N3 | |||
| or N9 corresponding 5QI/QFI or RQI information MUST be there in | or N9 corresponding 5QI/QFI or RQI information MUST be there in | |||
| the encapsulation header. | the encapsulation header. | |||
| o If SSC Mode3 Section 3.4.3 is used, segmented path (gNB to | o In some SSC modes Section 3.4, if segmented path (gNB to | |||
| staging/ULCL/BP-UPF to anchor-point-UPF) with corresponding path | staging/ULCL/BP-UPF to anchor-point-UPF) is needed, then | |||
| characteristics MUST be used. This includes a path from gNB/CSR | corresponding path characteristics MUST be used. This includes a | |||
| to UL-CL/BP UPF [TS.23.501-3GPP] and UL-CL/BP UPF to eventual UPF | path from gNB/CSR to UL-CL/BP UPF [TS.23.501-3GPP] and UL-CL/BP | |||
| access to DN. | UPF to eventual UPF access to DN. | |||
| o Continuous monitoring of transport path characteristics and | o Continuous monitoring of transport path characteristics and | |||
| reassignment at the endpoints MUST be performed. For all the | reassignment at the endpoints MUST be performed. For all the | |||
| effected PDU sessions, degraded transport paths need to be updated | effected PDU sessions, degraded transport paths need to be updated | |||
| dynamically with similar alternate paths. | dynamically with similar alternate paths. | |||
| o During UE mobility event similar to 4G/LTE i.e., gNB mobility (Xn | o During UE mobility event similar to 4G/LTE i.e., gNB mobility (Xn | |||
| based or N2 based), for target gNB selection, apart from radio | based or N2 based), for target gNB selection, apart from radio | |||
| resources, transport resources MUST be factored. This enables | resources, transport resources MUST be factored. This enables | |||
| handling of all PDU sessions from the UE to target gNB and this | handling of all PDU sessions from the UE to target gNB and this | |||
| require co-ordination of AMF, SMF with the TNF module. | require co-ordination of gNB, AMF, SMF with the TNF module. | |||
| Changes to detailed signaling to integrate the above for various 5GS | Changes to detailed signaling to integrate the above for various 5GS | |||
| procedures as defined in [TS.23.502-3GPP] is beyond the scope of this | procedures as defined in [TS.23.502-3GPP] is beyond the scope of this | |||
| document. | document. | |||
| 2.3. Transport Network Function | ||||
| Proposed TNF as part of the 5GC shown in Figure 1 can be realized | ||||
| using Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN). ACTN | ||||
| architecture, underlying topology abstraction methods and | ||||
| manageability considerations of the same are detailed in [RFC8453]. | ||||
| 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay | 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay | |||
| In a network implementing source routing, packets may be transported | In a network implementing source routing, packets may be transported | |||
| through the use of Segment Identifiers (SIDs), where a SID uniquely | through the use of Segment Identifiers (SIDs), where a SID uniquely | |||
| identifies a segment as defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]. | identifies a segment as defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]. | |||
| Section 5.3 [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane] lays out | Section 5.3 [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane] lays out | |||
| all SRv6 features along with a few concerns in Section 5.3.7 of the | all SRv6 features along with a few concerns in Section 5.3.7 of the | |||
| same document. Those concerns are addressed by a new backhaul | same document. Those concerns are addressed by a new backhaul | |||
| routing mechanism called Preferred Path Routing (PPR), of which this | routing mechanism called Preferred Path Routing (PPR), of which this | |||
| Section provides an overview. | Section provides an overview. | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 9 ¶ | |||
| in multiple benefits including significant reduction in network layer | in multiple benefits including significant reduction in network layer | |||
| overhead, increased performance and hardware compatibility for | overhead, increased performance and hardware compatibility for | |||
| carrying both path and services along the path. | carrying both path and services along the path. | |||
| Details of the IGP extensions for PPR are provided here: | Details of the IGP extensions for PPR are provided here: | |||
| o IS-IS - [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] | o IS-IS - [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] | |||
| o OSPF - [I-D.chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing] | o OSPF - [I-D.chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing] | |||
| 3.1. PPR with Transport Slicing aware Mobility on N3/N9 | 3.1. PPR with Transport Awareness for 5GS on N3/N9 Interfaces | |||
| PPR does not remove GTP-U, unlike some other proposals laid out in | PPR does not remove GTP-U, unlike some other proposals laid out in | |||
| [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. Instead, PPR works | [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. Instead, PPR works | |||
| with the existing cellular user plane (GTP-U) for both N3 and any | with the existing cellular user plane (GTP-U) for both N3 and any | |||
| approach selected for N9 (encap or no-encap). In this scenario, PPR | approach selected for N9 (encap or no-encap). In this scenario, PPR | |||
| will only help providing TE benefits needed for 5G slices from | will only help providing TE benefits needed for 5G slices from | |||
| transport domain perspective. It does so without adding any | transport domain perspective. It does so without adding any | |||
| additional overhead to the user plane, unlike SR-MPLS or SRv6. This | additional overhead to the user plane, unlike SR-MPLS or SRv6. This | |||
| is achieved by: | is achieved by: | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 41 ¶ | |||
| +----+ +--++ | | +----+ +--++ | | |||
| UE1 |gNB2+======+CSR+------N3--------+ | UE1 |gNB2+======+CSR+------N3--------+ | |||
| == +----+ +---+ | == +----+ +---+ | |||
| Figure 4: SSC Mode1 with integrated Transport Slice Function | Figure 4: SSC Mode1 with integrated Transport Slice Function | |||
| In this mode, IP address at the UE is preserved during mobility | In this mode, IP address at the UE is preserved during mobility | |||
| events. This is similar to 4G/LTE mechanism and for respective | events. This is similar to 4G/LTE mechanism and for respective | |||
| slices, corresponding PPR-ID (TE Path) has to be assigned to the | slices, corresponding PPR-ID (TE Path) has to be assigned to the | |||
| packet at UL and DL direction. During Xn mobility as shown above, | packet at UL and DL direction. During Xn mobility as shown above, | |||
| AMF has to additionally ensure transport path's resources from TNF | source gNB has to additionally ensure transport path's resources from | |||
| are available at the target gNB apart from radio resources check (at | TNF are available at the target gNB apart from radio resources check | |||
| decision and request phase of Xn/N2 mobility scenario). | (at decision and request phase of Xn/N2 mobility scenario). | |||
| 3.4.2. SSC Mode2 | 3.4.2. SSC Mode2 | |||
| In this case, if IP Address is changed during mobility (different UPF | In this case, if IP Address is changed during mobility (different UPF | |||
| area), then corresponding PDU session is released. No session | area), then corresponding PDU session is released. No session | |||
| continuity from the network is provided and this is designed as an | continuity from the network is provided and this is designed as an | |||
| application offload and application manages the session continuity, | application offload and application manages the session continuity, | |||
| if needed. For PDU Session, Service Request and Mobility cases | if needed. For PDU Session, Service Request and Mobility cases | |||
| mechanism to select the transport resource and the PPR-ID (TE Path) | mechanism to select the transport resource and the PPR-ID (TE Path) | |||
| is similar to SSC Mode1. | is similar to SSC Mode1. | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 28 ¶ | |||
| 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability | 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability | |||
| RSVP-TE [RFC3209] provides a lean transport overhead for the TE path | RSVP-TE [RFC3209] provides a lean transport overhead for the TE path | |||
| for MPLS user plane. However, it is perceived as less dynamic in | for MPLS user plane. However, it is perceived as less dynamic in | |||
| some cases and has some provisioning overhead across all the nodes in | some cases and has some provisioning overhead across all the nodes in | |||
| N3 and N9 interface nodes. Also it has another drawback with | N3 and N9 interface nodes. Also it has another drawback with | |||
| excessive state refresh overhead across adjacent nodes and this can | excessive state refresh overhead across adjacent nodes and this can | |||
| be mitigated with [RFC8370]. | be mitigated with [RFC8370]. | |||
| SR-TE [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] does not explicitly signal | SR-TE [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] does not explicitly signal | |||
| neither bandwidth reservation nor mechanism to guarantee latency on | bandwidth reservation or mechanism to guarantee latency on the nodes/ | |||
| the nodes/links on SR path. But, SR allows path steering for any | links on SR path. But, SR allows path steering for any flow at the | |||
| flow at the ingress and particular path for a flow can be chosen. | ingress and particular path for a flow can be chosen. Some of the | |||
| Some of the issues around path overhead/tax, MTU issues are | issues around path overhead/tax, MTU issues are documented at | |||
| documented at Section 5.3 of | Section 5.3 of [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. SR- | |||
| [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. Also SR allows | MPLS allows reduction of the control protocols to one IGP (with out | |||
| reduction of the control protocols to one IGP (with out needing for | needing for LDP and RSVP-TE). | |||
| LDP and RSVP). | ||||
| However, as specified above with PPR (Section 3), in the integrated | However, as specified above with PPR (Section 3), in the integrated | |||
| transport network function (TNF) a particular RSVP-TE path for MPLS | transport network function (TNF) a particular RSVP-TE path for MPLS | |||
| or SR path for MPLS and IPv6 with SRH user plane, can be supplied to | or SR path for MPLS and IPv6 with SRH user plane, can be supplied to | |||
| NSSF/AMF/SMF for mapping a particular PDU session to the transport | SMF for mapping a particular PDU session to the transport path. | |||
| path. | ||||
| 5. New Control Plane and User Planes | ||||
| 5.1. LISP and PPR | ||||
| PPR can also be used with LISP control plane for 3GPP as described in | ||||
| [I-D.farinacci-lisp-mobile-network]. This can be achieved by mapping | ||||
| the UE IP address (EID) to PPR-ID, which acts as Routing Locator | ||||
| (RLOC). Any encapsulation supported by LISP can work well with PPR. | ||||
| If the RLOC refers to an IPv4 or IPv6 destination address in the LISP | ||||
| encapsulated header, packets are transported on the preferred path in | ||||
| the network as opposed to traditional shortest path routing with no | ||||
| additional user plane overhead related to TE path in the network | ||||
| layer. | ||||
| Some of the distinct advantages of the LISP approach is, its | ||||
| scalability, support for service continuity in SSC Mode3 as well as | ||||
| native support for session continuity (session survivable mobility). | ||||
| Various other advantages are documented at | ||||
| [I-D.farinacci-lisp-mobile-network]. | ||||
| 5.2. ILA and PPR | ||||
| If an ILA-prefix is allowed to refer to a PPR-ID, ILA can be | ||||
| leveraged with all the benefits (including mobility) that it | ||||
| provides. This works fine in the DL direction as packet is destined | ||||
| to UE IP address at UPF. However, in the UL direction, packet is | ||||
| destined to an external internet address (SIR Prefix to ILA Prefix | ||||
| transformation happens on the Source address of the original UE | ||||
| packet). One way to route the packet with out bringing the complete | ||||
| DFZ BGP routing table is by doing a default route to the UPF (ILA-R). | ||||
| In this case, how TE can be achieved is TBD (to be expanded further | ||||
| with details). | ||||
| 6. Summary and Benefits with PPR | 5. Summary and Benefits with PPR | |||
| This document specifies an approach to transport and slice aware | This document specifies an approach to transport and slice aware | |||
| mobility with a simple mapping function from PDU Session to transport | mobility with a simple mapping function from PDU Session to transport | |||
| path applicable to any TE underlay. | path applicable to any TE underlay. | |||
| This also describes PPR | This also describes PPR | |||
| [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing], a transport underlay | [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing], a transport underlay | |||
| routing mechanism, which helps with goal of optimized user plane for | routing mechanism, which helps with goal of optimized user plane for | |||
| N9 interface. PPR provides a method for N3 and N9 interfaces to | N9 interface. PPR provides a method for N3 and N9 interfaces to | |||
| support transport slicing in a way which does not erase the gains | support transport slicing in a way which does not erase the gains | |||
| made with 5GNR and virtualized cellular core network features for | made with 5GNR and virtualized cellular core network features for | |||
| various types of 5G traffic (e.g. needing low and deterministic | various types of 5G traffic (e.g. needing low and deterministic | |||
| latency, real-time, mission-critical or AR/VR traffic). PPR provides | latency, real-time, mission-critical or AR/VR traffic). PPR provides | |||
| path steering, optionally guaranteed services with TE, unique Fast- | path steering, optionally guaranteed services with TE, unique Fast- | |||
| ReRoute (FRR) mechanism with preferred backups (beyond shortest path | ReRoute (FRR) mechanism with preferred backups (beyond shortest path | |||
| backups through existing LFA schemes) in the mobile backhaul network | backups through existing LFA schemes) in the mobile backhaul network | |||
| with any underlay being used in the operator's network (IPv4, IPv6 or | with any underlay being used in the operator's network (IPv4, IPv6 or | |||
| MPLS) in an optimized fashion. | MPLS) in an optimized fashion. | |||
| 7. Acknowledgements | 6. Acknowledgements | |||
| TBD. | Thanks to Young Lee and John Kaippallimalil for discussions on this | |||
| document including ACTN applicability for the proposed TNF. Thanks | ||||
| to Sri Gundavelli and 3GPP delegates who provided detailed feedback | ||||
| on this document. | ||||
| 8. IANA Considerations | 7. IANA Considerations | |||
| This document has no requests for any IANA code point allocations. | This document has no requests for any IANA code point allocations. | |||
| 9. Security Considerations | 8. Security Considerations | |||
| This document does not introduce any new security issues. | This document does not introduce any new security issues. | |||
| 10. References | 9. References | |||
| 10.1. Normative References | 9.1. 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, | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | |||
| 10.2. Informative References | 9.2. Informative References | |||
| [I-D.bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa] | [I-D.bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa] | |||
| Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., | Bashandy, A., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., | |||
| Francois, P., and d. daniel.voyer@bell.ca, "Topology | Francois, P., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Clad, F., and P. | |||
| Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing", draft- | Camarillo, "Topology Independent Fast Reroute using | |||
| bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-04 (work in | Segment Routing", draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti- | |||
| progress), April 2018. | lfa-05 (work in progress), October 2018. | |||
| [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane] | [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane] | |||
| Bogineni, K., Akhavain, A., Herbert, T., Farinacci, D., | Bogineni, K., Akhavain, A., Herbert, T., Farinacci, D., | |||
| Rodriguez-Natal, A., Carofiglio, G., Auge, J., | Rodriguez-Natal, A., Carofiglio, G., Auge, J., | |||
| Muscariello, L., Camarillo, P., and S. Homma, "Optimized | Muscariello, L., Camarillo, P., and S. Homma, "Optimized | |||
| Mobile User Plane Solutions for 5G", draft-bogineni-dmm- | Mobile User Plane Solutions for 5G", draft-bogineni-dmm- | |||
| optimized-mobile-user-plane-01 (work in progress), June | optimized-mobile-user-plane-01 (work in progress), June | |||
| 2018. | 2018. | |||
| [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] | [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] | |||
| skipping to change at page 17, line 14 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 28 ¶ | |||
| [I-D.chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing] | [I-D.chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing] | |||
| Chunduri, U., Qu, Y., White, R., Tantsura, J., and L. | Chunduri, U., Qu, Y., White, R., Tantsura, J., and L. | |||
| Contreras, "Preferred Path Routing (PPR) in OSPF", draft- | Contreras, "Preferred Path Routing (PPR) in OSPF", draft- | |||
| chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing-01 (work in | chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing-01 (work in | |||
| progress), July 2018. | progress), July 2018. | |||
| [I-D.farinacci-lisp-mobile-network] | [I-D.farinacci-lisp-mobile-network] | |||
| Farinacci, D., Pillay-Esnault, P., and U. Chunduri, "LISP | Farinacci, D., Pillay-Esnault, P., and U. Chunduri, "LISP | |||
| for the Mobile Network", draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile- | for the Mobile Network", draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile- | |||
| network-03 (work in progress), March 2018. | network-04 (work in progress), September 2018. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane] | [I-D.ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane] | |||
| Matsushima, S., Filsfils, C., Kohno, M., Camarillo, P., | Matsushima, S., Filsfils, C., Kohno, M., Camarillo, P., | |||
| daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., and C. Perkins, "Segment Routing | daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., and C. Perkins, "Segment Routing | |||
| IPv6 for Mobile User Plane", draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile- | IPv6 for Mobile User Plane", draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile- | |||
| uplane-02 (work in progress), July 2018. | uplane-02 (work in progress), July 2018. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] | [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] | |||
| Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., | Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., | |||
| Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing | Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing | |||
| skipping to change at page 18, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 35 ¶ | |||
| [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF | [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF | |||
| Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, | Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>. | |||
| [RFC8370] Beeram, V., Ed., Minei, I., Shakir, R., Pacella, D., and | [RFC8370] Beeram, V., Ed., Minei, I., Shakir, R., Pacella, D., and | |||
| T. Saad, "Techniques to Improve the Scalability of RSVP-TE | T. Saad, "Techniques to Improve the Scalability of RSVP-TE | |||
| Deployments", RFC 8370, DOI 10.17487/RFC8370, May 2018, | Deployments", RFC 8370, DOI 10.17487/RFC8370, May 2018, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8370>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8370>. | |||
| [RFC8453] Ceccarelli, D., Ed. and Y. Lee, Ed., "Framework for | ||||
| Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN)", RFC 8453, | ||||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC8453, August 2018, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8453>. | ||||
| [TS.23.401-3GPP] | [TS.23.401-3GPP] | |||
| 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "Procedures for | 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "Procedures for | |||
| 4G/LTE System; 3GPP TS 23.401, v15.4.0", June 2018. | 4G/LTE System; 3GPP TS 23.401, v15.4.0", June 2018. | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] | [TS.23.501-3GPP] | |||
| 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "System | 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "System | |||
| Architecture for 5G System; Stage 2, 3GPP TS 23.501 | Architecture for 5G System; Stage 2, 3GPP TS 23.501 | |||
| v2.0.1", December 2017. | v2.0.1", December 2017. | |||
| [TS.23.502-3GPP] | [TS.23.502-3GPP] | |||
| skipping to change at page 18, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 19, line 15 ¶ | |||
| [TS.23.503-3GPP] | [TS.23.503-3GPP] | |||
| 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "Policy and | 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "Policy and | |||
| Charging Control System for 5G Framework; Stage 2, 3GPP TS | Charging Control System for 5G Framework; Stage 2, 3GPP TS | |||
| 23.503 v1.0.0", December 2017. | 23.503 v1.0.0", December 2017. | |||
| [TS.29.281-3GPP] | [TS.29.281-3GPP] | |||
| 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "GPRS Tunneling | 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), "GPRS Tunneling | |||
| Protocol User Plane (GTPv1-U), 3GPP TS 29.281 v15.1.0", | Protocol User Plane (GTPv1-U), 3GPP TS 29.281 v15.1.0", | |||
| December 2017. | December 2017. | |||
| Authors' Addresses | Appendix A. Appendix: New Control Plane and User Planes | |||
| A.1. LISP and PPR | ||||
| PPR can also be used with LISP control plane for 3GPP as described in | ||||
| [I-D.farinacci-lisp-mobile-network]. This can be achieved by mapping | ||||
| the UE IP address (EID) to PPR-ID, which acts as Routing Locator | ||||
| (RLOC). Any encapsulation supported by LISP can work well with PPR. | ||||
| If the RLOC refers to an IPv4 or IPv6 destination address in the LISP | ||||
| encapsulated header, packets are transported on the preferred path in | ||||
| the network as opposed to traditional shortest path routing with no | ||||
| additional user plane overhead related to TE path in the network | ||||
| layer. | ||||
| Some of the distinct advantages of the LISP approach is, its | ||||
| scalability, support for service continuity in SSC Mode3 as well as | ||||
| native support for session continuity (session survivable mobility). | ||||
| Various other advantages are documented at | ||||
| [I-D.farinacci-lisp-mobile-network]. | ||||
| A.2. ILA and PPR | ||||
| If an ILA-prefix is allowed to refer to a PPR-ID, ILA can be | ||||
| leveraged with all the benefits (including mobility) that it | ||||
| provides. This works fine in the DL direction as packet is destined | ||||
| to UE IP address at UPF. However, in the UL direction, packet is | ||||
| destined to an external internet address (SIR Prefix to ILA Prefix | ||||
| transformation happens on the Source address of the original UE | ||||
| packet). One way to route the packet with out bringing the complete | ||||
| DFZ BGP routing table is by doing a default route to the UPF (ILA-R). | ||||
| In this case, how TE can be achieved is TBD (to be expanded further | ||||
| with details). | ||||
| Authors' Addresses | ||||
| Uma Chunduri (editor) | Uma Chunduri (editor) | |||
| Huawei USA | Huawei USA | |||
| 2330 Central Expressway | 2330 Central Expressway | |||
| Santa Clara, CA 95050 | Santa Clara, CA 95050 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: uma.chunduri@huawei.com | Email: uma.chunduri@huawei.com | |||
| Richard Li | Richard Li | |||
| Huawei USA | Huawei USA | |||
| 2330 Central Expressway | 2330 Central Expressway | |||
| Santa Clara, CA 95050 | Santa Clara, CA 95050 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: renwei.li@huawei.com | Email: renwei.li@huawei.com | |||
| Jeff Tantsura | Jeff Tantsura | |||
| Nuage Networks | Apstra, Inc. | |||
| 755 Ravendale Drive | ||||
| Mountain View, CA 94043 | ||||
| USA | ||||
| Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com | Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com | |||
| Luis M. Contreras | Luis M. Contreras | |||
| Telefonica | Telefonica | |||
| Sur-3 building, 3rd floor | Sur-3 building, 3rd floor | |||
| Madrid 28050 | Madrid 28050 | |||
| Spain | Spain | |||
| Email: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com | Email: luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com | |||
| End of changes. 36 change blocks. | ||||
| 118 lines changed or deleted | 136 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||