| < draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-02.txt | draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-03.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: April 19, 2019 J. Tantsura | Expires: August 18, 2019 S. Bhaskaran | |||
| Huawei Technologies India Pvt Ltd | ||||
| J. Tantsura | ||||
| Apstra, Inc. | Apstra, Inc. | |||
| L. Contreras | L. Contreras | |||
| Telefonica | Telefonica | |||
| X. De Foy | P. Muley | |||
| InterDigital Communications, LLC | Nokia | |||
| October 16, 2018 | February 14, 2019 | |||
| Transport Network aware Mobility for 5G | Transport Network aware Mobility for 5G | |||
| draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-02 | draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-03 | |||
| 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 is specified in a way to fit into the 5G core network | |||
| defined in [TS23.501] and to be backward compatible with LTE | architecture defined in [TS23.501]. | |||
| [TS.23.401-3GPP] network deployments. | ||||
| It focuses on an optimized mobile user plane functionality with | It focuses on an optimized mobile user plane functionality with | |||
| various transport services needed for some of the 5G traffic needing | various transport services needed for some of the 5G traffic needing | |||
| low and deterministic latency, real-time, mission-critical services. | low and deterministic latency, real-time, mission-critical services. | |||
| This document describes, how this objective is achieved agnostic to | This document describes, how this objective is achieved agnostic to | |||
| the transport underlay used (IPv4, IPv6, MPLS) in various deployments | the transport underlay used (IPv4, IPv6, MPLS) in various deployments | |||
| and with a new transport network underlay routing, called Preferred | and with a new transport network underlay routing, called Preferred | |||
| Path Routing (PPR). | Path Routing (PPR). | |||
| Requirements Language | Requirements Language | |||
| 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 April 19, 2019. | This Internet-Draft will expire on August 18, 2019. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2019 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 | |||
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
| to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
| include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
| the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
| 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.2. Integrated Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.2. Integrated Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 2.3. Transport Network Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 2.3. Transport Network Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 3.1. PPR with Transport Awareness for 5GS on N3/N9 Interfaces 10 | 3.1. PPR with Transport Awareness for 5GS on N3/N9 Interfaces 11 | |||
| 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes . . . . . 12 | 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3.4. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3.4. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3.4.1. SSC Mode1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 3.4.1. SSC Mode1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3.4.2. SSC Mode2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 3.4.2. SSC Mode2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 3.4.3. SSC Mode3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 3.4.3. SSC Mode3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 5. Summary and Benefits with PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 8. Contributing Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| Appendix A. Appendix: New Control Plane and User Planes . . . . 19 | Appendix A. Appendix: New Control Plane and User Planes . . . . 20 | |||
| A.1. LISP and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | A.1. LISP and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| A.2. ILA and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | A.2. ILA and PPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 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] and [TS.23.503-3GPP]. User Plane Functions (UPF) | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] has been created between 2 User Plane | are the data forwarding entities in the 5GC architecture. The | |||
| Functionalities (UPFs). While user plane for N9 interface being | architecture allows the placement of Branching Point (BP) and Uplink | |||
| finalized for REL16, both GTP-U based encapsulation or any other | Classifier (ULCL) UPFs closer to the access network (5G-AN). The 5G- | |||
| compatible approach is being considered [CT4SID]. Concerning to this | AN can be a radio access network or any non-3GPP access network, for | |||
| document another relevant interface is N3, which is between gNB and | example, WLAN. The IP address is anchored by a PDU session anchor | |||
| the UPF. N3 interface is similar to the user plane interface S1U in | UPF (PSA UPF). The interface between the BP/ULCL UPF and the PSA UPF | |||
| LTE [TS.23.401-3GPP]. This document: | is called N9. While in REL15, 3GPP has adopted GTP-U for the N9 | |||
| interface, new user plane protocols along with GTP-U are being | ||||
| investigated for N9 interface in REL16, as part of [CT4SID]. | ||||
| Concerning to this document another relevant interface is N3, which | ||||
| is between the 5G-AN and the UPF. N3 interface is similar to the | ||||
| user plane interface S1U in LTE [TS.23.401-3GPP]. This document: | ||||
| o does not propose any change to existing N3 user plane | o does not propose any change to existing N3 user plane | |||
| encapsulations to realize the benefits with the approach specified | encapsulations to realize the benefits with the approach specified | |||
| here | here | |||
| o and can work with any encapsulation (including GTP-U) for the N9 | o and can work with any encapsulation (including GTP-U) for the N9 | |||
| interface. | interface. | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] defines various Session and Service Continuity (SSC) | [TS.23.501-3GPP] defines network slicing as one of the core | |||
| modes and mobility scenarios for 5G with slice awareness from Radio | capability of 5GC with slice awareness from Radio and 5G Core (5GC) | |||
| and 5G Core (5GC) network. 5G System (5GS) as defined, allows | network. It also defines various Session and Service Continuity | |||
| transport network between N3 and N9 interfaces work independently | (SSC) modes and mobility scenarios for 5G. The 5G System (5GS) as | |||
| with various IETF Traffic Engineering (TE) technologies. | defined, allows transport network between N3 and N9 interfaces work | |||
| independently with various IETF Traffic Engineering (TE) | ||||
| technologies. | ||||
| However, lack of underlying Transport Network (TN) awareness can be | However, lack of underlying Transport Network (TN) awareness may lead | |||
| problematic for some of the 5GS procedures, for real-time, mission- | to selection of sub-optimal UPF(s) and/or 5G-AN during 5GS | |||
| critical or for any deterministic latency services. These 5GS | procedures. This could lead to inability to meet SLAs for real-time, | |||
| procedures including but not limited to Service Request, PDU Session, | mission-critical or latency sensitive services. These 5GS procedures | |||
| or User Equipment (UE) mobility need same service level | including but not limited to Service Request, PDU Session | |||
| characteristics from the TN for the Protocols Data Unit (PDU) | Establishment, or User Equipment (UE) mobility need same service | |||
| session, similar to as provided in Radio and 5GC for various 5QI's | level characteristics from the TN for the Protocols Data Unit (PDU) | |||
| defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP] . | session, similar to as provided in Radio and 5GC for the various | |||
| Slice Service Types (SST) and 5QI's defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP] . | ||||
| 1.1. Acronyms | 1.1. Acronyms | |||
| 5QI - 5G QoS Indicator | 5QI - 5G QoS Indicator | |||
| 5G-AN - 5G Access Network | ||||
| AMF - Access and Mobility Management Function (5G) | AMF - Access and Mobility Management Function (5G) | |||
| BP - Branch Point (5G) | BP - Branch Point (5G) | |||
| CSR - Cell Site Router | CSR - Cell Site Router | |||
| DN - Data Network (5G) | DN - Data Network (5G) | |||
| eMBB - enhanced Mobile Broadband (5G) | eMBB - enhanced Mobile Broadband (5G) | |||
| FRR - Fast ReRoute | FRR - Fast ReRoute | |||
| gNB - 5G NodeB | gNB - 5G NodeB | |||
| GBR - Guaranteed Bit Rate (5G) | GBR - Guaranteed Bit Rate (5G) | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 39 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 4 ¶ | |||
| RQI - Reflective QoS Indicator (5G) | RQI - Reflective QoS Indicator (5G) | |||
| SBI - Service Based Interface (5G) | SBI - Service Based Interface (5G) | |||
| SID - Segment Identifier | SID - Segment Identifier | |||
| SMF - Session Management Function (5G) | SMF - Session Management Function (5G) | |||
| SSC - Session and Service Continuity (5G) | SSC - Session and Service Continuity (5G) | |||
| SST - Slice and Service Types (5G) | SST - Slice and Service Types (5G) | |||
| SR - Segment Routing | SR - Segment Routing | |||
| TE - Traffic Engineering | TE - Traffic Engineering | |||
| ULCL - Uplink Classifier (5G) | ULCL - Uplink Classifier (5G) | |||
| UPF - User Plane Function (5G) | UPF - User Plane Function (5G) | |||
| URLLC - Ultra reliable and low latency communications (5G) | URLLC - Ultra reliable and low latency communications (5G) | |||
| 1.2. Solution Approach | 1.2. Solution Approach | |||
| This document specifies a mechanism to fulfil the needs of 5GS to | This document specifies a mechanism to fulfil the needs of 5GS to | |||
| transport user plane traffic from gNB to UPF for all service | transport user plane traffic from 5G-AN to UPF for all service | |||
| continuity modes [TS.23.501-3GPP] in an optimized fashion. This is | continuity modes [TS.23.501-3GPP] in an optimized fashion. This is | |||
| done by, keeping mobility procedures aware of underlying transport | done by, keeping mobility procedures aware of underlying transport | |||
| network along with slicing requirements. TN with mobility awareness | network along with slicing requirements. | |||
| described here in a way, which does not erase performance and latency | ||||
| gains made with 5G New Radio(5GNR) and virtualized cellular core | ||||
| 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. | |||
| the end, Section 5 recapitulates the benefits of specified approach | ||||
| 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 | | |||
| +-------+ | +-----+ | +------+ | +-----+ +-----+ | +----+ | +-------+ | +-----+ | +------+ | +-----+ +-----+ | +----+ | |||
| +---+----+ +--+--+ +---=++ +--------------+-+ | +---+----+ +--+--+ +---=++ +--------------+-+ | |||
| | AMF | | PCF | | TNF | | SMF | | | AMF | | PCF | | TNF | | SMF | | |||
| +---+--+-+ +-----+ +-+-+-+ +-+-----------+--+ | +---+--+-+ +-----+ +-+-+-+ +-+-----------+--+ | |||
| N1 | | | | To | | N1 | | | | To | | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 28 ¶ | |||
| +---+ +---+ +-+------+ +-------+ +----+ | +---+ +---+ +-+------+ +-------+ +----+ | |||
| | +----+ | | +----+ | |||
| +-| DN | | +-| DN | | |||
| N6 +----+ | N6 +----+ | |||
| Figure 1: 5G Service Based Architecture | Figure 1: 5G Service Based Architecture | |||
| The above diagrams depicts one of the scenarios of the 5G network | The above diagrams depicts one of the scenarios of the 5G network | |||
| specified in [TS.23.501-3GPP] and with a new and virtualized control | specified in [TS.23.501-3GPP] and with a new and virtualized control | |||
| component Transport Network Function (TNF). A Cell Site Router (CSR) | component Transport Network Function (TNF). A Cell Site Router (CSR) | |||
| is shown connecting to gNB. Though it is shown as a separate block | is shown connecting to gNB. gNB is an entity in 5G-AN. Though it is | |||
| from gNB, in some cases both of these can be co-located. This | shown as a separate block from gNB, in some cases both of these can | |||
| document concerns with backhaul TN, from CSR to UPF on N3 interface | be co-located. This document concerns with backhaul TN, from CSR to | |||
| or from Staging UPF to Anchor UPF on N9 interface. | UPF on N3 interface or from Staging UPF to Anchor UPF on N9 | |||
| interface. | ||||
| Currently specified Control Plane (CP) functions Access and Mobility | Currently specified Control Plane (CP) functions - the Access and | |||
| Management Function (AMF), Session Management Function (SMF) and User | Mobility Management Function (AMF), the Session Management Function | |||
| plane (UP) components gNodeB (gNB), User Plane Function (UPF) with | (SMF) and the User plane (UP) components gNodeB (gNB), User Plane | |||
| N2, N3, N4, N6 and N9 are relevant to this document. Other | Function (UPF) with N2, N3, N4, N6 and N9 interfaces are relevant to | |||
| Virtualized 5G control plane components NRF, AUSF, PCF, AUSF, UDM, | this document. Other Virtualized 5G control plane components NRF, | |||
| NEF, and AF are not directly relevant for the discussion in this | AUSF, PCF, AUSF, UDM, NEF, and AF are not directly relevant for the | |||
| document and one can see the functionalities of these in | discussion in this document and one can see the functionalities of | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | these in [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | |||
| From encapsulation perspective, N3 interface is similar to S1U in 4G/ | From encapsulation perspective, N3 interface is similar to S1U in 4G/ | |||
| LTE [TS.23.401-3GPP] network and uses GTP-U [TS.29.281-3GPP] to | LTE [TS.23.401-3GPP] network and uses GTP-U [TS.29.281-3GPP] to | |||
| transport any UE PDUs (IPv4, IPv6, IPv4v6, Ethernet or Unstructured). | transport any UE PDUs (IPv4, IPv6, IPv4v6, Ethernet or Unstructured). | |||
| Unlike S1U, N3 has some additional aspects as there is no bearer | Unlike S1U, N3 has some additional aspects as there is no bearer | |||
| concept and per no per bearer GTP-U tunnels. Instead, QoS | concept and no per bearer GTP-U tunnels. Instead, QoS information is | |||
| information is carried in the PDU Session Container GTP-U extension | carried in the PDU Session Container GTP-U extension header. N9 | |||
| header. N9 interface is a new interface to connect UPFs and right | interface is a new interface to connect UPFs and the right user plane | |||
| user plane protocol/encapsulation is being studied through 3GPP CT4 | protocols for N9, including GTP-U, are 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 | |||
| In this approach transport network functionality from gNB to UPF is | In this approach transport network functionality from the 5G-AN to | |||
| discrete and 5GS is not aware of the underlying transport network and | UPF is discrete and 5GS is not aware of the underlying transport | |||
| the resources available. Deployment specific mapping function is | network and the resources available. Deployment specific mapping | |||
| used to map the GTP-U encapsulated traffic at gNB at UL and UPF in DL | function is used to map the GTP-U encapsulated traffic at the 5G-AN | |||
| direction to the appropriate transport slice or transport Traffic | (e.g. gNB) in UL and UPF in DL direction to the appropriate transport | |||
| Engineered (TE) paths. These TE paths can be established using RSVP- | slice or transport Traffic Engineered (TE) paths. These TE paths can | |||
| TE [RFC3209] for MPLS underlay, SR [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] | be established using RSVP-TE [RFC3209] for MPLS underlay, SR | |||
| for both MPLS and IPv6 underlay or PPR | [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] for both MPLS and IPv6 underlay or | |||
| [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] with MPLS, IPv6 with | PPR [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] with MPLS, IPv6 | |||
| SRH, native IPv6 and native IPv4 underlays. | with SRH, native IPv6 and native IPv4 underlays. | |||
| In this case, the encapsulation provided by GTP-U helps carry | As per [TS.23.501-3GPP] and [TS.23.502-3GPP] the SMF controls the | |||
| different PDU session types (IPv4, IPv6, IPv4IPv6, Ethernet and | user plane traffic forwarding rules in the UPF. The UPFs have a | |||
| Unstructured) independent of the underlying transport or user plane | concept of a "Network Instance" which logically abstracts the | |||
| (IPv4, IPv6 or MPLS) network. Mapping of the PDU sessions to TE | underlying transport path. When the SMF creates the packet detection | |||
| paths can be done based on the source UDP port ranges (if these are | rules (PDR) and forwarding action rules (FAR) for a PDU session at | |||
| assigned based on the PDU session QCIs, as done in some deployments | the UPF, the SMF identifies the network instance through which the | |||
| with 4G/LT) of the GTP-U encapsulated packet or based on the 5QI or | packet matching the PDR has to be forwarded. A network instance can | |||
| RQI values in the GTP-U header. Here, TNF as shown in Figure 1 need | be mapped to a TE path at the UPF. In this approach, TNF as shown in | |||
| not be part of the 5G Service Based Interface (SBI). Only management | Figure 1 need not be part of the 5G Service Based Interface (SBI). | |||
| plane functionality is needed to create, monitor, manage and delete | Only management plane functionality is needed to create, monitor, | |||
| (life cycle management) the transport TE paths/transport slices from | manage and delete (life cycle management) the transport TE paths/ | |||
| gNB to UPF (on N3/N9 interfaces). This approach provide partial | transport slices from the 5G-AN to the UPF (on N3/N9 interfaces). | |||
| integration of the transport network into 5GS with some benefits. | The management plane functionality also provides the mapping of such | |||
| TE paths to a network instance identifier to the SMF. The SMF uses | ||||
| this mapping to install appropriate FARs in the UPF. This approach | ||||
| provide partial 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 the 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 event, without knowing if | be, a target gNB selection during a N2 mobility event, without | |||
| the target gNB is having a underlay transport slice resource for the | knowing if the target gNB is having a underlay transport slice | |||
| 5QI of the PDU session. The below approach can mitigate this. | resource for the S-NSSAI and 5QI of the PDU session. The Integrated | |||
| approach specified below can 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 including selecting a | [TS.23.501-3GPP] concerns with multiple aspects including selecting a | |||
| network slice instance when requested by AMF based on the requested | network slice instance when requested by AMF based on the requested | |||
| SNSSAI, current location of UE, roaming indication etc. It also | SNSSAI, current location of UE, roaming indication etc. It also | |||
| notifies NF service consumers (e.g AMF) whenever the status about the | notifies NF service consumers (e.g AMF) whenever the status about the | |||
| slice availability changes. However, the scope is only in 5GC (both | slice availability changes. However, the scope is only in 5GC (both | |||
| control and user plane) and NG Radio Access network including N3IWF | control and user plane) and NG Radio Access network including the | |||
| for non-3GPP access. Slice functionality is per PDU session | N3IWF for the non-3GPP access. The network slice instance(s) | |||
| granularity, which covers needed functionality and resources from UE | selected by the NSSF are applicable at a per PDU session granularity. | |||
| registration, Tracking Area (TA) updates, mobility and roaming, | An SMF and UPF are allocated from the selected slice instance during | |||
| resources and functionalities needed from transport network is not | the PDU session establishment procedure. [TS.23.501-3GPP] and | |||
| specified. This is seen as independent functionality and currently | [TS.23.502-3GPP] do not consider the resources and functionalities | |||
| not part of 5GS. If transport network is not factored in an | needed from transport network for the selection of UPF. This is seen | |||
| integrated fashion w.r.t available resources (with network | as independent functionality and currently not part of 5GS. If | |||
| characteristics from desired bandwidth, latency, burst size handling | transport network is not factored in an integrated fashion w.r.t | |||
| and optionally jitter) some of the gains made with optimizations | available resources (with network characteristics from desired | |||
| through 5GNR and 5GC can be degraded. | bandwidth, latency, burst size handling and optionally jitter) some | |||
| of the gains made with optimizations 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 5G | |||
| 'Ns' can use one or more mechanism available today (PCEP [RFC5440], | Access Network (e.g. gNB/CSR). 'Ns' can use one or more mechanism | |||
| NETCONF [RFC6241], RESTCONF [RFC8040] or gNMI) to provision the L2/L3 | available today (PCEP [RFC5440], NETCONF [RFC6241], RESTCONF | |||
| VPNs along with TE underlay paths from gNB to UPF. Ns and Nn | [RFC8040] or gNMI) to provision the L2/L3 VPNs along with TE underlay | |||
| interfaces can be part of the integrated 3GPP architecture, but the | paths from gNB to UPF. Ns and Nn interfaces can be part of the | |||
| specification/ownership of these interfaces SHOULD be left out of | integrated 3GPP architecture, but the specification/ownership of | |||
| scope of 3GPP. | 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 5G-AN/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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 33 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 21 ¶ | |||
| transport VPN and the TE path information for that slice. | 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 The TNF MUST provide an API that takes as input the source and | |||
| done. One way to do this is through 5QI/QFI information in the | destination 3GPP user plane element address, required bandwidth, | |||
| GTP-U header and map the same to the underlying transport path | latency and jitter characteristics between those user plane | |||
| (including VPN or PW). This works for uplink (UL) direction. | elements and returns as output a particular TE path's identifier, | |||
| that satisfies the requested requirements. | ||||
| o For downlink direction RQI need to be considered to map the DL | o Mapping of PDU session parameters to underlay SST paths need to be | |||
| packet to one of the underlay paths at the UPF. | done. One way to do this to let the SMF install a Forwarding | |||
| Action Rule (FAR) in the UPF via N4 with the FAR pointing to a | ||||
| "Network Instance" in the UPF. A "Network Instance" is a logical | ||||
| identifier for an underlying network. The "Network Instance" | ||||
| pointed by the FAR can be mapped to a transport path (through L2/ | ||||
| L3 VPN). FARs are associated with Packet Detection Rule (PDR). | ||||
| PDRs are used to classify packets in the uplink (UL) and the | ||||
| downlink (DL) direction. For UL GTP-U TEID and/or the QFI marked | ||||
| in the GTPU packet can be used for classifying a packet belonging | ||||
| to a particular slice characteristics. For DL, at a PSA UPF, the | ||||
| UE IP address is used to identify the PDU session, and hence the | ||||
| slice a packet belongs to and the IP 5 tuple can be used for | ||||
| identifying the flow and QoS characteristics to be applied on the | ||||
| packet. | ||||
| 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 QFI information MUST be there in the | |||
| the encapsulation header. | encapsulation header. | |||
| o In some SSC modes Section 3.4, if 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) is needed, then | staging/ULCL/BP-UPF to anchor-point-UPF) is needed, then | |||
| corresponding path characteristics MUST be used. This includes a | corresponding path characteristics MUST be used. This includes a | |||
| path from gNB/CSR to UL-CL/BP UPF [TS.23.501-3GPP] and UL-CL/BP | path from gNB/CSR to UL-CL/BP UPF [TS.23.501-3GPP] and UL-CL/BP | |||
| UPF to eventual UPF 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 | affected 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 gNB, 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 | Integrating the TNF as part of the 5GS Service Based Interfaces, | |||
| procedures as defined in [TS.23.502-3GPP] is beyond the scope of this | provides the flexibility to control the allcoation of required | |||
| document. | characteristics from the TN during a 5GS signalling procedure (e.g. | |||
| PDU Session Establishment). If TNF is seen as part of management | ||||
| plane, this real time flexibility is lost. 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 document. | ||||
| 2.3. Transport Network Function | 2.3. Transport Network Function | |||
| Proposed TNF as part of the 5GC shown in Figure 1 can be realized | Proposed TNF as part of the 5GC shown in Figure 1 can be realized | |||
| using Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN). ACTN | using Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN). ACTN | |||
| architecture, underlying topology abstraction methods and | architecture, underlying topology abstraction methods and | |||
| manageability considerations of the same are detailed in [RFC8453]. | 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. | |||
| The label/PPR-ID refer not to individual segments of which the path | The label/PPR-ID refer not to individual segments of which the path | |||
| is composed, but to the identifier of a path that is deployed on | is composed, but to the identifier of a path that is deployed on | |||
| network nodes. The fact that paths and path identifiers can be | network nodes. The fact that paths and path identifiers can be | |||
| computed and controlled by a controller, not a routing protocol, | computed and controlled by a controller, not a routing protocol, | |||
| allows the deployment of any path that network operators prefer, not | allows the deployment of any path that network operators prefer, not | |||
| just shortest paths. As packets refer to a path towards a given | just shortest paths. As packets refer to a path towards a given | |||
| destination and nodes make their forwarding decision based on the | destination and nodes make their forwarding decision based on the | |||
| identifier of a path, not the identifier of a next segment node, it | identifier of a path, not the identifier of a next segment node, it | |||
| is no longer necessary to carry a sequence of labels. This results | is no longer necessary to carry a sequence of labels. This results | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 24 ¶ | |||
| 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: | |||
| o For 3 different SSTs, 3 PPR-IDs can signaled from any node in the | o For 3 different SSTs, 3 PPR-IDs can be signaled from any node in | |||
| transport network. For Uplink traffic, gNB will choose the right | the transport network. For Uplink traffic, the 5G-AN will choose | |||
| PPR-ID of the UPF based on the 5QI value in the encapsulation | the right PPR-ID of the UPF based on the S-NSSAI the PDU Session | |||
| header of the PDU session. Similarly in the Downlink direction | belongs to and/or the QFI (e.g. 5QI) marking on the GTP-U | |||
| matching PPR-ID of the gNB is chosen for the RQI value in the | encapsulation header. Similarly in the Downlink direction | |||
| encapsulated SL payload. The table below shows a typical mapping: | matching PPR-ID of the 5G-AN is chosen based on the S-NSSAI the | |||
| PDU Session belongs to. The table below shows a typical mapping: | ||||
| +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | |||
| | 5QI (Ranges)/ | SST | Transport Path | Transport Path | | | QFI (Ranges) | SST | Transport Path | Transport Path | | |||
| | RQI (Ranges) | | Info | Characteristics | | | | in S-NSSAI | Info | Characteristics | | |||
| +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | |||
| | Range Xx - Xy | | | | | | Range Xx - Xy | | | | | |||
| | X1, X2(discrete| MIOT | PW ID/VPN info, | GBR (Guaranteed | | | X1, X2(discrete| MIOT | PW ID/VPN info, | GBR (Guaranteed | | |||
| | values) | (massive | PPR-ID-A | Bit Rate) | | | values) | (massive | PPR-ID-A | Bit Rate) | | |||
| | | IOT) | | Bandwidth: Bx | | | | IOT) | | Bandwidth: Bx | | |||
| | | | | Delay: Dx | | | | | | Delay: Dx | | |||
| | | | | Jitter: Jx | | | | | | Jitter: Jx | | |||
| +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | |||
| | Range Yx - Yy | | | | | | Range Yx - Yy | | | | | |||
| | Y1, Y2(discrete| URLLC | PW ID/VPN info, | GBR with Delay | | | Y1, Y2(discrete| URLLC | PW ID/VPN info, | GBR with Delay | | |||
| | values) | (ultra-low | PPR-ID-B | Req. | | | values) | (ultra-low | PPR-ID-B | Req. | | |||
| | | latency) | | Bandwidth: By | | | | latency) | | Bandwidth: By | | |||
| | | | | Delay: Dy | | | | | | Delay: Dy | | |||
| | | | | Jitter: Jy | | | | | | Jitter: Jy | | |||
| +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | |||
| | Range Zx - Zy | | | | | | Range Zx - Zy | | | | | |||
| | Z1, Z2(discrete| EMBB | PW ID/VPN info, | Non-GBR | | | Z1, Z2(discrete| EMBB | PW ID/VPN info, | Non-GBR | | |||
| | values) | (broadband)| PPR-ID-C | Bandwidth: Bx | | | values) | (broadband)| PPR-ID-C | Bandwidth: Bx | | |||
| +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | |||
| Figure 2: 5QI/RQI Mapping with PPR-IDs on N3/N9 | Figure 2: QFI Mapping with PPR-IDs on N3/N9 | |||
| o It is possible to have a single PPR-ID for multiple input points | o It is possible to have a single PPR-ID for multiple input points | |||
| through a PPR tree structure separate in UL and DL direction. | through a PPR tree structure separate in UL and DL direction. | |||
| o Same set of PPRs are created uniformly across all needed gNBs and | o Same set of PPRs are created uniformly across all needed 5G-ANs | |||
| UPFs to allow various mobility scenarios. | and UPFs to allow various mobility scenarios. | |||
| o Any modification of TE parameters of the path, replacement path | o Any modification of TE parameters of the path, replacement path | |||
| and deleted path needed to be updated from TNF to the relevant | and deleted path needed to be updated from TNF to the relevant | |||
| ingress points. Same information can be pushed to the NSSF, AMF | ingress points. Same information can be pushed to the NSSF, and/ | |||
| and SMF as needed. | or SMF as needed. | |||
| o PPR can be supported with any native IPv4 and IPv6 data/user | o PPR can be supported with any native IPv4 and IPv6 data/user | |||
| planes (Section 3.2 with optional TE features Section 3.3 . As | planes (Section 3.2) with optional TE features (Section 3.3) . As | |||
| this is an underlay mechanism it can work with any overlay | this is an underlay mechanism it can work with any overlay | |||
| encapsulation approach including GTP-U as defined currently for N3 | encapsulation approach including GTP-U as defined currently for N3 | |||
| interface. | interface. | |||
| 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes | 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes | |||
| PPR works in fully compatible way with SR defined user planes (SR- | PPR works in fully compatible way with SR defined user planes (SR- | |||
| MPLS and SRv6) by reducing the path overhead and other challenges as | MPLS and SRv6) by reducing the path overhead and other challenges as | |||
| listed in [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] or | listed in [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing] or | |||
| Section 5.3.7 of [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. PPR | Section 5.3.7 of [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. PPR | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 35 ¶ | |||
| requirements) not only for providing committed bandwidth or | requirements) not only for providing committed bandwidth or | |||
| deterministic latency, but also for assuring overall service level | deterministic latency, but also for assuring overall service level | |||
| guarantee in the network. This approach does not require per-hop | guarantee in the network. This approach does not require per-hop | |||
| provisioning and reduces the OPEX by minimizing the number of | provisioning and reduces the OPEX by minimizing the number of | |||
| protocols needed and allows dynamism with Fast-ReRoute (FRR) | protocols needed and allows dynamism with Fast-ReRoute (FRR) | |||
| capabilities. | capabilities. | |||
| 3.4. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures | 3.4. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures | |||
| PPR fulfills the needs of 5GS to transport the user plane traffic | PPR fulfills the needs of 5GS to transport the user plane traffic | |||
| from gNB to UPF in all 3 SSC modes defined [TS.23.501-3GPP]. This is | from 5G-AN to UPF in all 3 SSC modes defined [TS.23.501-3GPP]. This | |||
| done in keeping the backhaul network at par with 5G slicing | is done in keeping the backhaul network at par with 5G slicing | |||
| requirements that are applicable to Radio and virtualized core | requirements that are applicable to Radio and virtualized core | |||
| network to create a truly end-to-end slice path for 5G traffic. When | network to create a truly end-to-end slice path for 5G traffic. When | |||
| UE moves from one gNB to another gNB, there is no transport network | UE moves across the 5G-AN (e.g. from one gNB to another gNB), there | |||
| reconfiguration require with the approach above. | is no transport network reconfiguration required with the approach | |||
| above. | ||||
| SSC mode would be specified/defaulted by SMF. No change in the mode | SSC mode would be specified/defaulted by SMF. No change in the mode | |||
| once connection is initiated and this property is not altered here. | once connection is initiated and this property is not altered here. | |||
| 3.4.1. SSC Mode1 | 3.4.1. SSC Mode1 | |||
| +---+----+ +-----+ +----------------+ | +---+----+ +-----+ +----------------+ | |||
| | AMF | | TNF | | SMF | | | AMF | | TNF | | SMF | | |||
| +---+--+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+--------------+ | +---+--+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+--------------+ | |||
| N1 | | | | | N1 | | | | | |||
| +--------+ N2 +----Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 | +--------+ N2 +----Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 15 ¶ | |||
| 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. | |||
| 3.4.3. SSC Mode3 | 3.4.3. SSC Mode3 | |||
| In this mode, new IP address may be assigned because of UE moved to | In this mode, new IP address may be assigned because of UE moved to | |||
| another UPF coverage area. Network ensures UE suffers no loss of | another UPF coverage area. Network ensures UE suffers no loss of | |||
| 'connectivity'. A connection through new PDU session anchor point is | 'connectivity'. A connection through new PDU session anchor point is | |||
| established before the connection is terminated for better service | established before the connection is terminated for better service | |||
| continuity. | continuity. There are two ways in which this happens. | |||
| o Change of SSC Mode 3 PDU Session Anchor with multiple PDU | ||||
| Sessions. | ||||
| o Change of SSC Mode 3 PDU Session Anchor with IPv6 multi-homed PDU | ||||
| Session. | ||||
| In the first mode, from user plane perspective, the two PDU sessions | ||||
| are independent and the use of PPR-ID by gNB and UPFs is exactly | ||||
| similar to SSC Mode 1 described above. The following paragraphs | ||||
| describe the IPv6 multi-homed PDU session case for SSC Mode 3. | ||||
| +---+----+ +-----+ +----------------+ | +---+----+ +-----+ +----------------+ | |||
| | AMF | | TNF | | SMF | | | AMF | | TNF | | SMF | | |||
| +---+--+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-----------+--+ | +---+--+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-----------+--+ | |||
| N1 | | | | | | N1 | | | | | | |||
| to-UE+----+ N2 +-------Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 N4| | to-UE+----+ N2 +-------Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 N4| | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| +-------+--+ +--+-------+--+ +-----+-+ | +-------+--+ +--+-------+--+ +-----+-+ | |||
| |gNB/CSR +---N3---+ BP/ULCL UPF +-N9--+ UPF +-N6-- | |gNB/CSR +---N3---+ BP UPF +-N9--+ UPF +-N6-- | |||
| +----------+ +----------+--+ +-------+ to DN | +----------+ +----------+--+ +-------+ to DN | |||
| | +----+ | | +----+ | |||
| +-| DN | | +-| DN | | |||
| N6 +----+ | N6 +----+ | |||
| Figure 5: SSC Mode3 and Service Continuity | Figure 5: SSC Mode3 and Service Continuity | |||
| In the uplink direction for the traffic offloading from UL/CL case, | In the uplink direction for the traffic offloading from the Branching | |||
| packet has to reach to the right exit UPF. In this case packet gets | Point UPF, packet has to reach to the right exit UPF. In this case | |||
| re-encapsulated with ULCL marker (with either GTP-U or the chosen | packet gets re-encapsulated by the BP UPF (with either GTP-U or the | |||
| encapsulation) after bit rate enforcement and LI to the anchor UPF. | chosen encapsulation) after bit rate enforcement and LI, towards the | |||
| At this point packet has to be on the appropriate VPN/PW to the | anchor UPF. At this point packet has to be on the appropriate VPN/PW | |||
| anchor UPF. This mapping is done based on the 5QI to the PPR-ID of | to the anchor UPF. This mapping is done based on the S-NSSAI the PDU | |||
| the exit node by selecting the respective TE PPR-ID (PPR path) of the | session belongs to and/or the QFI marking in the GTPU encapsulation | |||
| UPF. If it's a non-MPLS underlay, destination IP address of the | header (e.g. 5QI value) to the PPR-ID of the exit node by selecting | |||
| encapsulation header would be the mapped PPR-ID (TE path). | the respective TE PPR-ID (PPR path) of the UPF. If it's a non-MPLS | |||
| underlay, destination IP address of the encapsulation header would be | ||||
| the mapped PPR-ID (TE path). | ||||
| In the downlink direction for the incoming packet, UPF has to | In the downlink direction for the incoming packet, UPF has to | |||
| encapsulate the packet (with either GTP-U or the chosen | encapsulate the packet (with either GTP-U or the chosen | |||
| encapsulation) to reach the BP/ULCL UPF. Here mapping is done for | encapsulation) to reach the BP UPF. Here mapping is done based on | |||
| RQI parameter in the encapsulation header to PPR-ID (TE Path) of the | the S-NSSAI the PDU session belongs, to the PPR-ID (TE Path) of the | |||
| BP/ULCL UPF. If it's a non-MPLS underlay, destination IP address of | BP UPF. If it's a non-MPLS underlay, destination IP address of the | |||
| the encapsulation header would be the mapped PPR-ID (TE path). In | encapsulation header would be the mapped PPR-ID (TE path). In | |||
| summary: | summary: | |||
| o Respective PPR-ID on N3 and N9 has to be selected with correct | o Respective PPR-ID on N3 and N9 has to be selected with correct | |||
| transport characteristics from TNF. | transport characteristics from TNF. | |||
| o For N2 based mobility AMF/SMF has to ensure transport resources | o For N2 based mobility SMF has to ensure transport resources are | |||
| are available for N3 Interface to new ULCL and from there the | available for N3 Interface to new BP UPF and from there the | |||
| original anchor point UPF. | original anchor point UPF. | |||
| o For Service continuity with multi-homed PDU session same transport | o For Service continuity with multi-homed PDU session same transport | |||
| network characteristics of the original PDU session (both on N3 | network characteristics of the original PDU session (both on N3 | |||
| and N9) need to be observed for the newly created PDU session. | and N9) need to be observed for the newly configured IPv6 | |||
| prefixes. | ||||
| 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]. | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 7 ¶ | |||
| issues around path overhead/tax, MTU issues are documented at | issues around path overhead/tax, MTU issues are documented at | |||
| Section 5.3 of [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. SR- | Section 5.3 of [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. SR- | |||
| MPLS allows reduction of the control protocols to one IGP (with out | MPLS allows reduction of the control protocols to one IGP (with out | |||
| needing for LDP and RSVP-TE). | needing for LDP and RSVP-TE). | |||
| 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 | |||
| SMF for mapping a particular PDU session to the transport path. | SMF for mapping a particular PDU session to the transport path. | |||
| 5. Summary and Benefits with PPR | 5. Acknowledgements | |||
| This document specifies an approach to transport and slice aware | ||||
| mobility with a simple mapping function from PDU Session to transport | ||||
| path applicable to any TE underlay. | ||||
| This also describes PPR | ||||
| [I-D.chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing], a transport underlay | ||||
| routing mechanism, which helps with goal of optimized user plane for | ||||
| N9 interface. PPR provides a method for N3 and N9 interfaces to | ||||
| support transport slicing in a way which does not erase the gains | ||||
| made with 5GNR and virtualized cellular core network features for | ||||
| various types of 5G traffic (e.g. needing low and deterministic | ||||
| latency, real-time, mission-critical or AR/VR traffic). PPR provides | ||||
| path steering, optionally guaranteed services with TE, unique Fast- | ||||
| ReRoute (FRR) mechanism with preferred backups (beyond shortest path | ||||
| backups through existing LFA schemes) in the mobile backhaul network | ||||
| with any underlay being used in the operator's network (IPv4, IPv6 or | ||||
| MPLS) in an optimized fashion. | ||||
| 6. Acknowledgements | ||||
| Thanks to Young Lee and John Kaippallimalil for discussions on this | Thanks to Young Lee and John Kaippallimalil for discussions on this | |||
| document including ACTN applicability for the proposed TNF. Thanks | document including ACTN applicability for the proposed TNF. Thanks | |||
| to Sri Gundavelli and 3GPP delegates who provided detailed feedback | to Sri Gundavelli and 3GPP delegates who provided detailed feedback | |||
| on this document. | on this document. | |||
| 7. IANA Considerations | 6. IANA Considerations | |||
| This document has no requests for any IANA code point allocations. | This document has no requests for any IANA code point allocations. | |||
| 8. Security Considerations | 7. Security Considerations | |||
| This document does not introduce any new security issues. | This document does not introduce any new security issues. | |||
| 8. Contributing Authors | ||||
| The following people contributed substantially to the content of this | ||||
| document and should be considered co-authors. | ||||
| Xavier De Foy | ||||
| InterDigital Communications, LLC | ||||
| 1000 Sherbrooke West | ||||
| Montreal | ||||
| Canada | ||||
| Email: Xavier.Defoy@InterDigital.com | ||||
| 9. References | 9. References | |||
| 9.1. 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>. | |||
| 9.2. Informative References | 9.2. Informative References | |||
| skipping to change at page 17, line 16 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 16 ¶ | |||
| 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] | |||
| Chunduri, U., Li, R., White, R., Tantsura, J., Contreras, | Chunduri, U., Li, R., White, R., Tantsura, J., Contreras, | |||
| L., and Y. Qu, "Preferred Path Routing (PPR) in IS-IS", | L., and Y. Qu, "Preferred Path Routing (PPR) in IS-IS", | |||
| draft-chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing-01 (work in | draft-chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing-02 (work in | |||
| progress), July 2018. | progress), February 2019. | |||
| [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-02 (work in | |||
| progress), July 2018. | progress), February 2019. | |||
| [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-04 (work in progress), September 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-03 (work in progress), October 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 | |||
| Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-15 (work | Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-15 (work | |||
| in progress), January 2018. | in progress), January 2018. | |||
| [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V., | [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V., | |||
| and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP | and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP | |||
| Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001, | Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001, | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at page 21, line 20 ¶ | |||
| 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 | |||
| Sridhar Bhaskaran | ||||
| Huawei Technologies India Pvt Ltd | ||||
| Survey No.37, Whitefield Road, Kundalahalli | ||||
| Bengaluru, Karnataka | ||||
| India | ||||
| Email: sridhar.bhaskaran@huawei.com | ||||
| Jeff Tantsura | Jeff Tantsura | |||
| Apstra, Inc. | Apstra, Inc. | |||
| 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 | |||
| Praveen Muley | ||||
| Nokia | ||||
| 440 North Bernardo Ave | ||||
| Mountain View, CA 94043 | ||||
| USA | ||||
| Xavier De Foy | Email: praveen.muley@nokia.com | |||
| InterDigital Communications, LLC | ||||
| 1000 Sherbrooke West | ||||
| Montreal | ||||
| Canada | ||||
| Email: Xavier.Defoy@InterDigital.com | ||||
| End of changes. 58 change blocks. | ||||
| 204 lines changed or deleted | 257 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/ | ||||