| < draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-04.txt | draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-05.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DMM Working Group U. Chunduri, Ed. | DMM Working Group U. Chunduri, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft R. Li | Internet-Draft R. Li | |||
| Intended status: Informational Futurewei | Intended status: Informational Futurewei | |||
| Expires: January 9, 2020 S. Bhaskaran | Expires: May 7, 2020 S. Bhaskaran | |||
| Altiostar | Altiostar | |||
| J. Kaippallimalil | ||||
| Futurewei | ||||
| J. Tantsura | J. Tantsura | |||
| Apstra, Inc. | Apstra, Inc. | |||
| L. Contreras | L. Contreras | |||
| Telefonica | Telefonica | |||
| P. Muley | P. Muley | |||
| Nokia | Nokia | |||
| J. Kaippallimalil | November 4, 2019 | |||
| Futurewei | ||||
| July 8, 2019 | ||||
| Transport Network aware Mobility for 5G | Transport Network aware Mobility for 5G | |||
| draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-04 | draft-clt-dmm-tn-aware-mobility-05 | |||
| 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 is specified in a way to fit into the 5G core network | approach is specified in a way to fit into the 5G core network | |||
| architecture defined in [TS23.501]. | architecture defined in [TS23.501]. | |||
| It focuses on an optimized mobile user plane functionality with | It focuses on an optimized mobile user plane functionality with | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 12 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 12 ¶ | |||
| 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 9, 2020. | This Internet-Draft will expire on May 7, 2020. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2019 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.1. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.1. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 1.2. Solution Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1.2. Solution Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 1.3. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1.3. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2. Transport Network and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 . . . . . 5 | 2. Transport Network and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 . . . . . 6 | |||
| 2.1. Integrated Approach with TNF in SBI . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.1. XHaul Transport Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.1.1. Transport Network Function and Interfaces . . . . . . 7 | 2.2. Mobile Transport Network Context (MTNC) and Scalability . 8 | |||
| 2.1.2. Functionality for E2E Management . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.3. Transport Network Function (TNF) . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 2.2. TNF as part of existing 5G Control Function . . . . . . . 9 | 2.4. TNF Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 2.2.1. Mobile Transport Network Context and Scalability . . 11 | 2.5. Transport Provisioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 2.2.2. MTNC Identifier in the Data Packet . . . . . . . . . 12 | 2.6. MTNC-ID in the Data Packet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 2.7. Functionality for E2E Management . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 3.1. PPR with Transport Awareness for 5GS on N3/N9 Interfaces 13 | 3. Using PPR as TN Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes . . . . . 15 | 3.1. PPR with Transport Awareness for 5GS on N3/N9 Interfaces 14 | |||
| 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 3.2. Path Steering Support to native IP user planes . . . . . 16 | |||
| 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 4. Other TE Technologies Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 8. Contributing Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 8. Contributing Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| Appendix A. New Control Plane and User Planes . . . . . . . . . 19 | 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| A.1. Slice aware Mobility: Discrete Approach . . . . . . . . . 19 | Appendix A. New Control Plane and User Planes . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| Appendix B. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures . . . . . . 20 | A.1. Slice aware Mobility: Discrete Approach . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| B.1. SSC Mode1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | Appendix B. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures . . . . . . 21 | |||
| B.2. SSC Mode2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | B.1. SSC Mode1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| B.3. SSC Mode3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | B.2. SSC Mode2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | B.3. SSC Mode3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | ||||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| 3GPP Release 15 for 5GC is defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP], | The 3GPP architecture for 5GS is defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP], | |||
| [TS.23.502-3GPP] and [TS.23.503-3GPP]. User Plane Functions (UPF) | [TS.23.502-3GPP] and [TS.23.503-3GPP]. The architecture defines a | |||
| are the data forwarding entities in the 5GC architecture. The | comprehensive set of functions for access mobility, session handling | |||
| architecture allows the placement of Branching Point (BP) and Uplink | and related functions for subscription management, authentication and | |||
| Classifier (ULCL) UPFs closer to the access network (5G-AN). The 5G- | policy among others. These network functions (NF) are defined using | |||
| AN can be a radio access network or any non-3GPP access network, for | a service-based architecture (SBA) that allows NFs to expose their | |||
| example, WLAN. The IP address is anchored by a PDU session anchor | functions via an API and common service framework. The architecture | |||
| UPF (PSA UPF). | also defines slicing aspects where the Network Slice Selection | |||
| Function (NSSF) assists the Access Mobility Manager (AMF) and Session | ||||
| N3, N9 Interfaces: The interface between the BP/ULCL UPF and the PSA | Management Function (SMF) to assist and select the right entities and | |||
| UPF is called N9 [TS.23.501-3GPP]. While in REL15, 3GPP has adopted | resources corresponding to the slice requested by the user equipment | |||
| GTP-U for the N9 interface, new user plane protocols along with GTP-U | (UE). The User Equipment (UE) indicates slice information in the | |||
| are being investigated for N9 interface in REL16, as part of | Network Slice Selection Assistance Information (NSSAI) field during | |||
| [CT4SID]. Concerning to this document another relevant interface is | session establishment (Attach). The AMF selects the right SMF and | |||
| N3, which is between the 5G-AN and the UPF. N3 interface is similar | the SMF in turn selects the User Plane Functions (UPF) so that the | |||
| to the user plane interface S1U in LTE [TS.23.401-3GPP]. This | QoS and capabilities requested can be fulfilled. UPFs are the data | |||
| document: | forwarding entities in the 5GC architecture. The architecture allows | |||
| the placement of Branching Point (BP) and Uplink Classifier (ULCL) | ||||
| o Do not need architectural change to[TS.23.501-3GPP] to provide | UPFs closer to the access network (5G-AN). The 5G-AN can be a radio | |||
| 3GPP slice, QoS support in transport plane | access network or any non-3GPP access network, for example, WLAN. | |||
| The IP address is anchored by a PDU session anchor UPF (PSA UPF). | ||||
| o and can work with any encapsulation (including GTP-U) for the N9 | 5GS allows more than one UPF on the path for a PDU (Protocol Data | |||
| interface. | Unit) session that provides various functionality including session | |||
| anchoring, uplink classification and branching point for a multihomed | ||||
| IPv6 PDU session. The interface between the BP/ULCL UPF and the PSA | ||||
| UPF is called N9 [TS.23.501-3GPP]. 3GPP has adopted GTP-U for the N9 | ||||
| and N3 interface between the various UPF instances and the (R)AN. | ||||
| 3GPP has specified control and user plane aspects in [TS.23.501-3GPP] | ||||
| to provide slice and QoS support. 3GPP has defined three broad slice | ||||
| types to cover enhanced mobile broadband (eMBB) communications, | ||||
| ultra-reliable low latency communications(URLLC) and massive internet | ||||
| of things (mIoT). ATIS [ATIS075] has defined an additional slice | ||||
| type for V2X services. There may be multiple instances of a slice | ||||
| type to satisfy some characteristics like isolation. The slice | ||||
| details in 3GPP, ATIS or NGMN do not specify how slice | ||||
| characteristics for QoS, hard /soft isolation, protection and other | ||||
| aspects should be satisfied in IP transport networks. This is | ||||
| explored further in this document. | ||||
| 1.1. Problem Statement | 1.1. Problem Statement | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] and [TS.23.502-3GPP] define network slicing as one | [TS.23.501-3GPP] and [TS.23.502-3GPP] define network slicing as one | |||
| of the core capability of 5GC with slice awareness from Radio and 5G | of the core capability of 5GC with slice awareness from Radio and 5G | |||
| Core (5GC) network. The 5G System (5GS) as defined, do not consider | Core (5GC) network. The 5G System (5GS) as defined, does not | |||
| the resources and functionalities needed from transport network for | consider the resources and functionalities needed from transport | |||
| the selection of UPF. This is seen as independent functionality and | network for the selection of UPF. This is seen as independent | |||
| currently not part of 5GS. | functionality and currently not part of 5GS. | |||
| However, the lack of underlying Transport Network (TN) awareness may | However, the lack of underlying Transport Network (TN) awareness may | |||
| lead to selection of sub-optimal UPF(s) and/or 5G-AN during 5GS | lead to selection of sub-optimal UPF(s) and/or 5G-AN during 5GS | |||
| procedures. This could also lead to inability to meet SLAs for real- | various procedures (e.g., session establishment, mobility). Meeting | |||
| time, mission-critical or latency sensitive services. 5GS procedures | the specific slice characteristics on the N3 and N9 interfaces | |||
| including but not limited to Service Request, PDU Session | depends on the IP transport underlay providing these resources and | |||
| Establishment, or User Equipment (UE) mobility need same service | capabilities. This could also lead to the inability in meeting SLAs | |||
| level characteristics from the TN for the Protocols Data Unit (PDU) | for real-time, mission-critical or latency sensitive services. 5GS | |||
| session, similar to as provided in Radio and 5GC for the various | procedures including but not limited to Service Request, PDU Session | |||
| Slice Service Types (SST) and 5QI's defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | Establishment, or UE mobility need same service level characteristics | |||
| from the TN for the Protocols Data Unit (PDU) 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]. | ||||
| The 5GS provides slices to its clients (UEs). The UE's PDU session | ||||
| spans the access network (radio) and N3 and N9 transport segments | ||||
| which have an IP transport underlay. The 5G operator needs to obtain | ||||
| slice capability from the IP transport provider. Several UE sessions | ||||
| that match a slice may be mapped to an IP transport segment. Thus | ||||
| there needs to be a mapping between the slice capability offered to | ||||
| the UE (NSSAI) and what is provided by the IP transport. | ||||
| 1.2. Solution Approach | 1.2. Solution Approach | |||
| This document specifies 2 approaches to fulfil the needs of 5GS to | This document specifies an approach to fulfil the needs of 5GS to | |||
| transport user plane traffic from 5G-AN 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. | network along with slicing requirements. | |||
| Section 2 describes in detail on how TN aware mobility can be built | Section 2 describes in detail on how TN aware mobility can be built | |||
| irrespective of underlying TN technology used. Using Preferred Path | irrespective of underlying TN technology used. Using Preferred Path | |||
| Routing (PPR), applicable to any transport network underlay (IPv6, | Routing (PPR), applicable to any transport network underlay (IPv6, | |||
| MPLS and IPv4) is detailed in Section 3. How other IETF TE | MPLS and IPv4) is detailed in Section 3. How other IETF TE | |||
| technologies applicable for this draft is specified in Section 4. At | technologies applicable for this draft is specified in Section 4. At | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 49 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 29 ¶ | |||
| 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) | |||
| GTP-U - GPRS Tunneling Protocol - Userplane (3GPP) | ||||
| IGP - Interior Gateway Protocols (e.g. IS-IS, OSPFv2, OSPFv3) | IGP - Interior Gateway Protocols (e.g. IS-IS, OSPFv2, OSPFv3) | |||
| LFA - Loop Free Alternatives (IP FRR) | LFA - Loop Free Alternatives (IP FRR) | |||
| mIOT - Massive IOT (5G) | mIOT - Massive IOT (5G) | |||
| MPLS - Multi Protocol Label Switching | MPLS - Multi Protocol Label Switching | |||
| QFI - QoS Flow ID (5G) | QFI - QoS Flow ID (5G) | |||
| PPR - Preferred Path Routing | PPR - Preferred Path Routing | |||
| PDU - Protocol Data Unit (5G) | PDU - Protocol Data Unit (5G) | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 4 ¶ | |||
| PDU - Protocol Data Unit (5G) | PDU - Protocol Data Unit (5G) | |||
| PW - Pseudo Wire | PW - Pseudo Wire | |||
| 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) | |||
| 2. Transport Network and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 | 2. Transport Network and Slice aware Mobility on N3/N9 | |||
| Currently specified Control Plane (CP) functions - the Access and | Currently specified Control Plane (CP) functions - the AMF, the SMF | |||
| Mobility Management Function (AMF), the Session Management Function | and the User plane (UP) components 5G-AN (e.g. gNB), UPF with N2, N3, | |||
| (SMF) and the User plane (UP) components gNB, User Plane Function | N4, N6 and N9 interfaces are relevant to this document. Other | |||
| (UPF) with N2, N3, N4, N6 and N9 interfaces are relevant to this | Virtualized 5G control plane components NRF, AUSF, PCF, AUSF, UDM, | |||
| document. Other Virtualized 5G control plane components NRF, AUSF, | NEF, and AF are not directly relevant for the discussion in this | |||
| 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 no per bearer GTP-U tunnels. Instead, QoS information is | concept and no per bearer GTP-U tunnels. Instead, QoS information is | |||
| carried in the PDU Session Container GTP-U extension header. | carried in the PDU Session Container GTP-U extension header. | |||
| +------+ +-----+ +-------+ +-----+ | ||||
| | NSSF | | NRF | | NWDAF | | PCF | | ||||
| +---+--+ +--+--+ +---+---+ +--+--+ | ||||
| | | | | | ||||
| --+-----+--------+--+-----------+-----+-----+----- | ||||
| | | Service Based Interfaces (SBI) | ||||
| | +-----+--------+ | | ||||
| +--+--+ | +-----+ NSSMF| +--+--+ | ||||
| +-----+ AMF | | | TNF | | | SMF | | ||||
| | +--+--+ | +--+--+ | +--+--+ | ||||
| | +---+----------+ | | ||||
| | |ACTN | | ||||
| | +---+--+ | | ||||
| N2 | +--------|SDN-C |-------+ | | ||||
| | | +--+---+ | +----------+ | ||||
| | |Ns _______ Nn| | N4 | | ||||
| | | ___/ \______|_______|__________|___ | ||||
| | | / | | | \ | ||||
| +------+ +--+---+ IP +-++ +--+---+ +--+----+ +--+ | ||||
| |(R)AN |====|CSR/PE| Backhaul |PE|+++|UP-NF2|+++|PE+UPF2|---|DN| | ||||
| +------+ +------+ +--+ +------+ +-------+ +--+ | ||||
| \___ _____________________________/ | ||||
| Front/ \ / N3 N9 N6 | ||||
| Midhaul +-----+ | ||||
| Figure 1: 5G Service Based Architecture with Transport Network | ||||
| TN Aware Mobility with optimized transport network functionality is | TN Aware Mobility with optimized transport network functionality is | |||
| explained below with approaches specified in Section 2.1 and | explained below. How PPR fits in this framework in detail along with | |||
| Section 2.2 . 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. Integrated Approach with TNF in SBI | 2.1. XHaul Transport Network | |||
| Service Based Interfaces (SBI) | Figure 1 depicts IP Xhaul network with SDN-C and CSR/PE (Provider | |||
| ----+-----+-----+----+----+-----+----+--------+-----+----+------ | Edge) routers provide IP transport service to 5GS user plane entities | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | 5G-AN (e.g. gNB) and UPF. 5GS architecture with key control and user | |||
| +---+---+ | +--+--+ | +--+---+ | +--+--+ +--+--+ | +-+--+ | plane entities and its interaction with the IP transport plane is | |||
| | NSSF | | | NRF | | | AUSF | | | UDM | | NEF | | | AF | | shown here. When a UE initiates session establishment, it indicates | |||
| +-------+ | +-----+ | +------+ | +-----+ +-----+ | +----+ | the desired slice type in the S-NSSAI (Specific Network Slice | |||
| +---+----+ +--+--+ +----++ +--------------+-+ | Selection Assistance Information) field. The AMF uses the S-NSSAI, | |||
| | AMF | | PCF | | TNF | | SMF | | other subscription information and configuration in the NSSF to | |||
| +---+--+-+ +-----+ +-+-+-+ +-+-----------+--+ | select the appropriate SMF and the SMF in turn selects UPFs (User | |||
| N1 | | | | To | | Plane Functions) that are able to provide the specified slice | |||
| to-UE+----+ N2 +----Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 +--Nn-+ N4 | resources and capabilities. Some of the slice capabilities along the | |||
| | | | | | | | user plane path between the (R)AM and UPFs (N3, N9 segments) such as | |||
| +---+---+ +--++ +-+--+---+ +-+-----+ +----+ | a low latency path, jitter, protection and priority needs these to be | |||
| |gNB+======+CSR+------N3-----+ UPF +-N9--+ UPF +--N6--+ DN | | provided by the IP transport network. | |||
| +---+ +---+ +-+------+ +-------+ +----+ | ||||
| | +----+ | ||||
| +-| DN | | ||||
| N6 +----+ | ||||
| Figure 1: 5G Service Based Architecture | Interface between (R)AN/5G-AN and CSR includes fronthaul and midhaul | |||
| part of the transport network. In some cases midhaul can also a | ||||
| layer-2 network. In deployments where virtualized 5G-AN is used, F1U | ||||
| interface with GTP encapsulation is considered between the | ||||
| Distributed Unit (DU) and Centralized Unit (CU). | ||||
| The above diagrams depicts one of the scenarios of the 5G network | Slice capability required in IP transport networks is estimated and | |||
| specified in [TS.23.501-3GPP] and with a new and virtualized control | provisioned by the functionality as specified in Section 2.3 (TNF) | |||
| component Transport Network Function (TNF). A Cell Site Router (CSR) | with support from various other functions such as the Network Data | |||
| is shown connecting to gNB. gNB is an entity in 5G-AN. Though it is | Analytics Function (NWDAF), Network Resource Function (NRF) and | |||
| shown as a separate block from gNB, in some cases both of these can | Policy Control Function (PCF). Figure 1 depicts the PE router, where | |||
| be co-located. This document concerns with backhaul TN, from CSR to | transport paths are initiated/terminated can be deployed seperately | |||
| UPF on N3 interface or from Staging UPF to Anchor UPF on N9 | with UPF or both functionalities can be in the same node. The TNF | |||
| interface. | provisions this in the SDN-C of the IP XHaul network using ACTN | |||
| [RFC8453]. When a GTP encapsulated user packet from the (R)AN or UPF | ||||
| with the slice information traverses the F1U/N3/N9 segment, the PE | ||||
| router of the IP transport underlay can inspect the slice information | ||||
| and provide the provisioned capabilities. This is elaborated further | ||||
| in Section 2.5. | ||||
| Network Slice Selection Function (NSSF) as defined in | 2.2. Mobile Transport Network Context (MTNC) and Scalability | |||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] concerns with multiple aspects including selecting a | ||||
| network slice instance when requested by AMF based on the requested | ||||
| SNSSAI, current location of UE, roaming indication etc. It also | ||||
| notifies NF service consumers (e.g AMF) whenever the status about the | ||||
| slice availability changes. However, the scope is only in 5GC (both | ||||
| control and user plane) and NG Radio Access network including the | ||||
| N3IWF for the non-3GPP access. The network slice instance(s) | ||||
| selected by the NSSF are applicable at a per PDU session granularity. | ||||
| An SMF and UPF are allocated from the selected slice instance during | ||||
| the PDU session establishment procedure. | ||||
| 2.1.1. Transport Network Function and Interfaces | The MTNC represents a slice, QoS configuration for a transport path | |||
| between two 3GPP user plane functions. The Mobile-Transport Network | ||||
| Context Identifier (MTNC-ID) is generated by the TNF to be unique for | ||||
| each path and per traffic class (including QoS and slice aspects). | ||||
| Thus, there may be more than one MTNC-ID for the same QoS and path if | ||||
| there is a need to provide isolation (slice) of the traffic. It | ||||
| should be noted that MTNC are per class/path and not per user session | ||||
| (nor is it per data path entity). The MTNC-IDs are configured by the | ||||
| TNF to be unique within a provisioning domain. | ||||
| To assuage the above situation, TNF is described (Figure 1) as part | Since the MTNC-IDs are not generated per user flow or session, there | |||
| of control plane. This has the view of the underlying transport | is no need for unique MTNC-IDs per flow/session. In addition, since | |||
| network with all links and nodes as well as various possible underlay | the traffic estimation not performed at the time of session | |||
| paths with different characteristics. TNF can be seen as supporting | establishment, there is no provisioning delay experienced during | |||
| PCE functionality [RFC5440] and optionally BGP-LS [RFC7752] to get | session setup. The MTNC-ID space scales as a square of the number | |||
| the TE and topology information of the underlying IGP network. | sites between which 3GPP user plane functions require paths. If | |||
| there are T traffic classes across N sites, the number of MTNC-IDs in | ||||
| a fully meshed network is (N*(N-1)/2) * T. For example, if there are | ||||
| 3 traffic classes between 25 sites, there would be at most 900 MTNC- | ||||
| IDs required. Multiple slices for the same QoS class that need to be | ||||
| fully isolated, will add to the MTNC provisioning. An MTNC-ID space | ||||
| of 16 bits (65K+ identifiers) can be expected to be sufficient. | ||||
| 2.3. Transport Network Function (TNF) | ||||
| Figure 1 shows a view of the functions and interfaces for | ||||
| provisioning the MTNC-IDs. The focus is on provisioning between the | ||||
| 3GPP management plane (NSSMF), transport network (SDN-C) and carrying | ||||
| the MTNC-IDs in PDU packets for the transport network to grant the | ||||
| provisioned resources. | ||||
| In Figure 1, the TNF (logical functionality within the NSSMF) | ||||
| requests the SDN-C in the transport domain to program the TE path | ||||
| using ACTN [RFC 8453]. The SDN-C programs the Provider Edge (PE) | ||||
| routers and internal routers according to the underlay transport | ||||
| technology (e.g., PPR, MPLS, SRv6). The PE router inspects incoming | ||||
| PDU data packets for the MTNC-ID, classifies and provides the VN | ||||
| service provisioned across the transport network. | ||||
| The detailed mechanisms by which the NSSMF provides the MTNC-IDs to | ||||
| the control plane and user plane functions are for 3GPP to specify. | ||||
| Two possible options are outlined below for completeness. The NSSMF | ||||
| may provide the MTNC-IDs to the 3GPP control plane by either | ||||
| providing it to the Session Management Function (SMF), and the SMF in | ||||
| turn provisions the user plane functions (UP-NF1, UP-NF2) during PDU | ||||
| session setup. Alternatively, the user plane functions may request | ||||
| the MTNC-IDs directly from the TNF/NSSMF. Figure 1 shows the case | ||||
| where user plane entities request the TNF/NSSMF to translate the | ||||
| Request and get the MTNC-ID (over interface Ns/Nn). | ||||
| The TNF should be seen as a logical entity that can be part of NSSMF | ||||
| in the 3GPP management plane [TS.28.533-3GPP]. The NSSMF may use | ||||
| network configuration, policies, history, heuristics or some | ||||
| combination of these to derive traffic estimates that the TNF would | ||||
| use. How these estimates are derived are not in the scope of this | ||||
| document. The focus here is only in terms of how the TNF and SDN-C | ||||
| are programmed given that slice and QoS characteristics across a | ||||
| transport path can be represented by an MTNC-ID. The TNF requests | ||||
| the SDN-C in the transport network to provision paths in the | ||||
| transport domain based on the MTNC-ID. The TNF is capable of | ||||
| providing the MTNC-ID provisioned to control and user plane functions | ||||
| in the 3GPP domain. Detailed mechanisms for programming the MTNC-ID | ||||
| should be part of the 3GPP specifications. | ||||
| 2.4. TNF Interfaces | ||||
| A south bound interface Ns is shown which interacts with the 5G | A south bound interface Ns is shown which interacts with the 5G | |||
| Access Network (e.g. gNB/CSR). 'Ns' can use one or more mechanism | Access Network (e.g. CSR). 'Ns' can use one or more mechanism | |||
| available today (PCEP [RFC5440], NETCONF [RFC6241], RESTCONF | available today (PCEP [RFC5440], NETCONF [RFC6241], RESTCONF | |||
| [RFC8040] or gNMI) to provision the L2/L3 VPNs along with TE underlay | [RFC8040] or gNMI) to provision the L2/L3 VPNs along with TE underlay | |||
| paths from gNB to UPF. Ns and Nn interfaces can be part of the | paths from CSR to PE@UPF. Ns and Nn interfaces can be part of the | |||
| integrated 3GPP architecture, but the specification/ownership of | integrated 3GPP architecture, but the specification/ownership of | |||
| these interfaces SHOULD be left out of scope of 3GPP. | these interfaces SHOULD be left out of scope of 3GPP. | |||
| A north bound interface 'Nn' is shown from one or more of the | A 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 | transport network nodes (or PE @ ULCL/BP UPF, Anchor Point UPF) to | |||
| shown in Figure 1. It would enable learning the TE characteristics | TNF as shown in Figure 1. It would enable learning the TE | |||
| of all links and nodes of the network continuously (through BGP-LS | characteristics of all links and nodes of the network continuously | |||
| [RFC7752] or through a passive IGP adjacency and PCEP [RFC5440]). | (through BGP-LS [RFC7752] or through a passive IGP adjacency and PCEP | |||
| [RFC5440]). | ||||
| These VPNs and/or underlay TE paths MUST be similar on all 5G-AN/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]. | of the Slice/Service Types (SSTs)as defined in [TS.23.501-3GPP]. | |||
| Proposed TNF as part of the 5GC shown in Figure 1 can be realized | 2.5. Transport Provisioning | |||
| using Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN). ACTN | ||||
| architecture, underlying topology abstraction methods and | ||||
| manageability considerations of the same are detailed in [RFC8453]. | ||||
| 2.1.2. Functionality for E2E Management | Functionality of transport provisioning for an engineered IP | |||
| transport that supports 3GPP slicing and QoS requirements in | ||||
| [TS.23.501-3GPP] is described in this section. | ||||
| With the TNF in 5GS Service Based Interface, the following additional | During a PDU session setup, the AMF using input from the NSSF selects | |||
| functionalities are required for end-2-end slice management including | a network slice and SMF. The SMF with user policy from Policy | |||
| the transport network: | Control Function (PCF) sets 5QI (QoS parameters) and the UPF on the | |||
| path of the PDU session. While QoS and slice selection for the PDU | ||||
| session can be applied across the 3GPP control and user plane | ||||
| functions as outlined in Section 2, the IP transport underlay across | ||||
| N3 and N9 segments do not have enough information to apply the | ||||
| resource constraints represented by the slicing and QoS | ||||
| classification. Current guidelines for interconnection with | ||||
| transport networks [IR.34-GSMA] provide an application mapping into | ||||
| DSCP. However, these recommendations do not take into consideration | ||||
| other aspects in slicing like isolation, protection and replication. | ||||
| IP transport networks have their own slice and QoS configuration | ||||
| based on domain policies and the underlying network capability. | ||||
| Transport networks can enter into an agreement for virtual network | ||||
| services (VNS) with client domains using the ACTN [RFC8453] | ||||
| framework. An IP transport network may provide such slice instances | ||||
| to mobile network operators, CDN providers or enterprises for | ||||
| example. The 3GPP mobile network, on the other hand, defines a slice | ||||
| instance for UEs as are the the mobile operator's 'clients'. The | ||||
| Network Slice Selection Management Function (NSSMF) [TS 28.533] that | ||||
| interacts with a TN controller like an SDN-C (that is out of scope of | ||||
| 3GPP). | ||||
| The ACTN VN service can be used across the IP transport networks to | ||||
| provision and map the slice instance and QoS of the 3GPP domain to | ||||
| the IP transport domain. An abstraction that represents QoS and | ||||
| slice instance in the mobile domain and mapped to ACTN VN service in | ||||
| the transport domain is represented here as MTNC-IDs. Details of how | ||||
| the MTNC-IDs are derived are upto functions that can estimate the | ||||
| level of traffic demand. | ||||
| The 3GPP network/5GS provides slices instances to its clients (UE) | ||||
| that include resources for radio and mobile core segments. The UE's | ||||
| PDU session spans the access network (radio) and N3 and N9 transport | ||||
| segments which have an IP transport underlay. The 5G operator needs | ||||
| to obtain slice capability from the IP transport provider since these | ||||
| resources are not seen by the 5GS. Several UE sessions that match a | ||||
| slice may be mapped to an IP transport segment. Thus, there needs to | ||||
| be a mapping between the slice capability offered to the UE (NSSAI) | ||||
| and what is provided by the IP transport. | ||||
| When the 3GPP user plane function (5G-AN, UPF) does not terminate the | ||||
| transport underlay protocol (e.g., MPLS), it needs to be carried in | ||||
| the IP protocol header from end-to-end of the mobile transport | ||||
| connection (N3, N9). [I-D.ietf-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis] discusses | ||||
| these scenarios in detail. | ||||
| 2.6. MTNC-ID in the Data Packet | ||||
| When the 3GPP user plane function (5G-AN, UPF) and transport provider | ||||
| edge is on different nodes, the PE router needs to have the means by | ||||
| which to classify the PDU packet. The mapping information is | ||||
| provisioned between the 5G provider and IP transport network and | ||||
| corresponding information should be carried in each IP packet on the | ||||
| N3, N9 interface. To allow the IP transport edge nodes to inspect | ||||
| the transport context information efficiently, it should be carried | ||||
| in an IP header field that is easy to inspect. It may be noted that | ||||
| the N3 and N9 interfaces in 5GS are IP interfaces. Thus, Layer 2 | ||||
| alternatives such as VLAN will fail if there are multiple L2 networks | ||||
| on the N3 or N9 path. Another alternative is to use L3 VPNs. | ||||
| However, in the 5G architecture, there may be a large number of | ||||
| smaller UPFs that are dynamically inserted on path. Adding this VPN | ||||
| information for dynamic UPF insertion is configuration intensive and | ||||
| error prone. GTP (N3, N9 encapsulation header) field extensions | ||||
| offer a possibility, however these extensions are hard for a | ||||
| transport edge router to parse efficiently on a per packet basis. | ||||
| Other IP header fields like DSCP are not suitable as it only conveys | ||||
| the QoS aspects (but not other aspects like isolation, protection, | ||||
| etc.) | ||||
| IPv6 extension headers like FaST, or SRv6 may be options to carry the | ||||
| MTNC-ID when such mechanism is a viable (if complete transport | ||||
| network is IPv6 based). To mininise the protocol changes are | ||||
| required and make this underlay tranport independed (IPv4/IPv6/MPLS/ | ||||
| L2), an option is to provision a mapping of MTNC-ID to a UDP port | ||||
| range of the GTP encapsulated user packet. A simple mapping table | ||||
| between the MTNC-ID and the source UDP port number can be configured | ||||
| to ensure that ECMP /load balancing is not affected adversely by | ||||
| encoding the UDP source port with an MTNC-ID mapping. This mapping | ||||
| is configured in 3GPP user plane functions (5G-AN, UPF) and Provider | ||||
| Edge (PE) Routers that process MTNC-IDs. PE routers can thus | ||||
| provision a policy based on the source UDP port number (which | ||||
| reflects the mapped MTNC-ID) to underlying transport path and then | ||||
| deliver the QoS/slice resource provisioned in the transport network. | ||||
| The source UDP port that is encoded is the outer IP (corresponding to | ||||
| GTP header) while the inner IP packet (UE payload) is unaltered. | ||||
| 2.7. Functionality for E2E Management | ||||
| With the TNF finctionality in 5GS Service Based Interface, the | ||||
| following additional functionalities are required for end-2-end slice | ||||
| management including the transport network: | ||||
| o The Specific Network Slice Selection Assistance Information | o The Specific Network Slice Selection Assistance Information | |||
| (SNSSAI) of PDU session's SHOULD be mapped to the assigned | (S-NSSAI) of PDU session SHOULD be mapped to the assigned | |||
| 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 (CSR and PE@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 The TNF MUST provide an API that takes as input the source and | o The TNF MUST provide an API that takes as input the source and | |||
| destination 3GPP user plane element address, required bandwidth, | destination 3GPP user plane element address, required bandwidth, | |||
| latency and jitter characteristics between those user plane | latency and jitter characteristics between those user plane | |||
| elements and returns as output a particular TE path's identifier, | elements and returns as output a particular TE path's identifier, | |||
| that satisfies the requested requirements. | that satisfies the requested requirements. | |||
| 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 | |||
| done. One way to do this to let the SMF install a Forwarding | 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 | 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 | "Network Instance" in the UPF. A "Network Instance" is a logical | |||
| identifier for an underlying network. The "Network Instance" | identifier for an underlying network. The "Network Instance" | |||
| pointed by the FAR can be mapped to a transport path (through L2/ | pointed by the FAR can be mapped to a transport path (through L2/ | |||
| L3 VPN). FARs are associated with Packet Detection Rule (PDR). | L3 VPN). FARs are associated with Packet Detection Rule (PDR). | |||
| PDRs are used to classify packets in the uplink (UL) and the | 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 | downlink (DL) direction. For UL procedures specified in | |||
| in the GTPU packet can be used for classifying a packet belonging | Section 2.5, Section 2.6 can be used for classifying a packet | |||
| to a particular slice characteristics. For DL, at a PSA UPF, the | belonging to a particular slice characteristics. For DL, at a PSA | |||
| UE IP address is used to identify the PDU session, and hence the | UPF, the UE IP address is used to identify the PDU session, and | |||
| slice a packet belongs to and the IP 5 tuple can be used for | hence the slice a packet belongs to and the IP 5 tuple can be used | |||
| identifying the flow and QoS characteristics to be applied on the | for identifying the flow and QoS characteristics to be applied on | |||
| packet. | the packet at UPF. If a PE is not co-located at the UPF then | |||
| mapping to the underlying TE paths at PE happens based on the | ||||
| encapsulated GTP-US packet as specified in Section 2.6. | ||||
| 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 QFI information MUST be there in the | or N9 corresponding QFI information MUST be there in the | |||
| encapsulation header. | encapsulation header. | |||
| o In some SSC modes Appendix B, if segmented path (gNB to | o In some SSC modes Appendix B, if segmented path (CSR to | |||
| staging/ULCL/BP-UPF to anchor-point-UPF) is needed, then | PE@staging/ULCL/BP-UPF to PE@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 CSR to PE@UL-CL/BP UPF [TS.23.501-3GPP] and UL-CL/BP UPF | |||
| UPF to eventual UPF access to DN. | to eventual UPF access to DN. | |||
| o Continuous monitoring of transport path characteristics and | o Continuous monitoring of the underlying transport path | |||
| reassignment at the endpoints MUST be performed. For all the | characteristics should be enabled at the endpoints (technologies | |||
| affected PDU sessions, degraded transport paths need to be updated | for monitoring depends traffic engineering technique used as | |||
| dynamically with similar alternate paths. | described in Section 3 and Section 4). If path characteristics | |||
| are degraded, reassignment of the paths at the endpoints should be | ||||
| performed. For all the affected PDU sessions, degraded transport | ||||
| paths need to be updated 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. | |||
| Integrating the TNF as part of the 5GS Service Based Interfaces, | Integrating the TNF as part of the 5GS Service Based Interfaces, | |||
| provides the flexibility to control the allocation of required | provides the flexibility to control the allocation of required | |||
| characteristics from the TN during a 5GS signaling procedure (e.g. | characteristics from the TN during a 5GS signaling procedure (e.g. | |||
| PDU Session Establishment). If TNF is seen as part of management | PDU Session Establishment). If TNF is seen as part of management | |||
| plane, this real time flexibility is lost. Changes to detailed | plane, this real time flexibility is lost. Changes to detailed | |||
| signaling to integrate the above for various 5GS procedures as | signaling to integrate the above for various 5GS procedures as | |||
| defined in [TS.23.502-3GPP] is beyond the scope of this document. | defined in [TS.23.502-3GPP] is beyond the scope of this document. | |||
| 2.2. TNF as part of existing 5G Control Function | ||||
| Another solution approach with TNF in Section 2.1 and transport | ||||
| provisioning for an engineered IP transport that supports 3GPP | ||||
| slicing and QoS requirements in [TS.23.501-3GPP] is described in this | ||||
| section. | ||||
| During a PDU session setup, the 3GPP AMF using input from the NSSF | ||||
| selects a network slice and SMF. The SMF with user policy from | ||||
| Policy Control Function (PCF) sets 5QI (QoS parameters) and the UPF | ||||
| on the path of the PDU session. While QoS and slice selection for | ||||
| the PDU session can be applied across the 3GPP control and user plane | ||||
| functions as outlined above, the transport underlay across N3 and N9 | ||||
| segments do not have enough information to apply the resource | ||||
| constraints represented by the slicing and QoS classification. | ||||
| Current guidelines for interconnection with transport networks | ||||
| [IR.34-GSMA] provide an application mapping into DSCP. However, | ||||
| apart from problems with classification of encrypted packets, these | ||||
| recommendations do not take into consideration other aspects in | ||||
| slicing like isolation, protection and replication. | ||||
| Transport networks have their own slice and QoS configuration based | ||||
| on domain policies and the underlying network capability. Transport | ||||
| networks can enter into an agreement for virtual network services | ||||
| (VNS) with client domains using the ACTN [RFC8453] framework. The | ||||
| 3GPP mobile network, on the other side, defines a Network Slice | ||||
| Selection Management Function (NSSMF) [TS 28.533] that interacts with | ||||
| a TN domain manager (that is out of scope of 3GPP). | ||||
| The ACTN VN service can be used across the 3GPP and transport | ||||
| networks to provision and map between slices, QoS in the two domains. | ||||
| An abstraction that represents QoS and slice information in the | ||||
| mobile domain and mapped to ACTN VN service in the transport domain | ||||
| is represented here as MTNC (Mobile Transport Network Context) | ||||
| identifiers. Details of how the 3GPP domain derives the MTNC | ||||
| identifiers and how it programs it across its control and user plane | ||||
| functions are for 3GPP standards to define. For completeness, some | ||||
| minimal outlines are provided in the description below. | ||||
| When the 3GPP user plane function (gNB, UPF) does not terminate the | ||||
| transport underlay protocol (e.g., MPLS), it needs to be carried in | ||||
| the IP protocol header from end-to-end of the mobile transport | ||||
| connection (N3, N9). [I-D.ietf-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis] discusses | ||||
| these scenarios in detail. | ||||
| Figure 2 shows a view of the functions and interfaces for | ||||
| provisioning the MTNC identifiers. The focus is on provisioning | ||||
| between the 3GPP management plane (NSSMF), transport network (SDN-C) | ||||
| and carrying the MTNC identifiers in PDU packets for the transport | ||||
| network to grant the provisioned resources. | ||||
| +----------------------------------------------------+ | ||||
| | 3GPP Control/Management Plane | | ||||
| | +----------------------------------------|-------+ | ||||
| | | +---------------+ | | | ||||
| | | | +-----+ NSSMF | +---+---+ | | ||||
| | | | | TNF | | | SMF | | | ||||
| | | | +--+--+ | +---+---+ | | ||||
| | | +----|----------+ | | | ||||
| | +------|---------------------------------|-------+ | ||||
| | |ACTN (RFC8453) | | ||||
| | +---+---+ | | ||||
| | | SDN-C +---+ | | ||||
| | +---+---+ | | | ||||
| | 3GPP N2/N4 ___^___ |3GPP N2/N4 | ||||
| | _____/ \_____ | | ||||
| | / \ | | ||||
| +---+--+ +--+ IP +--+ +---+--+ | ||||
| |UP-NF1|+++++++++++|PE| Backhaul |PE|+++++++++|UP-NF2| | ||||
| +------+ +--+ +--+ +------+ | ||||
| \_____ _____/ | ||||
| \ / | ||||
| ---v--- | ||||
| Figure 2: 5G Transport Plane Provisioning | ||||
| In Figure 2, the TNF (logical functionality within the NSSMF) | ||||
| requests the SDN-C in the transport domain to program the TE path | ||||
| using ACTN [RFC 8453]. The SDN-C programs the Provider Edge (PE) | ||||
| routers and internal routers according to the underlay transport | ||||
| technology (e.g., PPR, MPLS, SRv6). The PE router inspects incoming | ||||
| PDU data packets for the MTNC identifier, classifies and provides the | ||||
| VN service provisioned across the transport network. | ||||
| The detailed mechanisms by which the NSSMF provides the MTNC | ||||
| identifiers to the control plane and user plane functions are for | ||||
| 3GPP to specify. Two possible options are outlined below for | ||||
| completeness. The NSSMF may provide the MTNC identifiers to the 3GPP | ||||
| control plane by either providing it to the Session Management | ||||
| Function (SMF), and the SMF in turn provisions the user plane | ||||
| functions (UP-NF1, UP-NF2) during PDU session setup. Alternatively, | ||||
| the user plane functions may request the MTNC identifiers directly | ||||
| from the NSSMF. | ||||
| In this approach, TNF can be seen as a logical entity that can be | ||||
| part of NSSMF in the 3GPP management plane [TS.28.533-3GPP]. The | ||||
| NSSMF may use network configuration, policies, history, heuristics or | ||||
| some combination of these to derive traffic estimates that the TNF | ||||
| would use. How these estimates are derived are not in the scope of | ||||
| this document. The focus here is only in terms of how the TNF and | ||||
| SDN-C are programmed given that slice and QoS characteristics across | ||||
| a transport path can be represented by an MTNC identifier. The TNF | ||||
| requests the SDN-C in the transport network to provision paths in the | ||||
| transport domain based on the MTNC identifier. The TNF is capable of | ||||
| providing the MTNC identifier provisioned to control and user plane | ||||
| functions in the 3GPP domain. Detailed mechanisms for programming | ||||
| the MTNC identifier should be part of the 3GPP specifications. | ||||
| 2.2.1. Mobile Transport Network Context and Scalability | ||||
| The MTNC (Mobile Transport Network Context) represents a slice, QoS | ||||
| configuration for a transport path between two 3GPP user plane | ||||
| functions. The Mobile-Transport Network Context Identifier (MTNC-ID) | ||||
| is generated by the TNF to be unique for each path and per traffic | ||||
| class (including QoS and slice aspects). Thus, there may be more | ||||
| than one MTNC-ID for the same QoS and path if there is a need to | ||||
| provide isolation (slice) of the traffic. It should be noted that | ||||
| MTNC are per class/path and not per user session (nor is it per data | ||||
| path entity). The MTNC identifiers are configured by the TNF to be | ||||
| unique within a provisioning domain. | ||||
| Since the MTNC identifiers are not generated per user flow or | ||||
| session, there is no need for unique MTNC identifiers per flow/ | ||||
| session. In addition, since the traffic estimation not performed at | ||||
| the time of session establishment, there is no provisioning delay | ||||
| experienced during session setup. The MTNC identifier space scales | ||||
| as a square of the number sites between which 3GPP user plane | ||||
| functions require paths. If there are T traffic classes across N | ||||
| sites, the number of MTNC identifiers in a fully meshed network is | ||||
| (N*(N-1)/2) * T. For example, if there are 3 traffic classes between | ||||
| 25 sites, there would be at most 900 MTNC identifiers required. | ||||
| Multiple slices for the same QoS class that need to be fully | ||||
| isolated, will add to the MTNC provisioning. An MTNC identifier | ||||
| space of 16 bits (65K+ identifiers) can be expected to be sufficient. | ||||
| 2.2.2. MTNC Identifier in the Data Packet | ||||
| When the 3GPP user plane function (gNB, UPF) and transport provider | ||||
| edge are on different nodes, the PE router needs to have the means by | ||||
| which to classify the PDU packet. IP header fields such as DSCP | ||||
| (DiffServ Code Point) or the IPv6 Flow Label do not satisfy the | ||||
| requirement as they are not immutable. | ||||
| Different options for carrying the MTNC identifier in the IP data | ||||
| packet or in the existing user plane overlay like GTP-U | ||||
| [TS.29.281-3GPP] or a new overlay like GUE | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-intarea-gue-extensions] are possible. There are various | ||||
| trade-offs in terms of packet overhead, support in IPv4 and IPv6 | ||||
| networks as well as working across legacy and evolving transport | ||||
| networks that need to be considered. These considerations will be | ||||
| addressed in future revisions. | ||||
| 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 as well as need for underlay agnostic | |||
| (L2/Ipv4/IPv6/MPLS) TE requirements are addressed by a new XHaul | ||||
| 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 | With PPR, the label/PPR-ID refer not to individual segments of which | |||
| is composed, but to the identifier of a path that is deployed on | the path is composed, but to the identifier of a path that is | |||
| network nodes. The fact that paths and path identifiers can be | deployed on network nodes. The fact that paths and path identifiers | |||
| computed and controlled by a controller, not a routing protocol, | can be computed and controlled by a controller, not a routing | |||
| allows the deployment of any path that network operators prefer, not | protocol, allows the deployment of any path that network operators | |||
| just shortest paths. As packets refer to a path towards a given | prefer, not just shortest paths. As packets refer to a path towards | |||
| destination and nodes make their forwarding decision based on the | a given destination and nodes make their forwarding decision based on | |||
| identifier of a path, not the identifier of a next segment node, it | the identifier of a path, not the identifier of a next segment node, | |||
| is no longer necessary to carry a sequence of labels. This results | it is no longer necessary to carry a sequence of labels. This | |||
| in multiple benefits including significant reduction in network layer | results in multiple benefits including significant reduction in | |||
| overhead, increased performance and hardware compatibility for | network layer overhead, increased performance and hardware | |||
| carrying both path and services along the path. | compatibility for 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 Awareness for 5GS on N3/N9 Interfaces | 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 (encapsulation or no-encapsulation). In | approach selected for N9 (encapsulation or no-encapsulation). In | |||
| this scenario, PPR will only help providing TE benefits needed for 5G | this scenario, PPR will only help providing TE benefits needed for 5G | |||
| slices from transport domain perspective. It does so without adding | slices from transport domain perspective. It does so for any | |||
| any additional overhead to the user plane, unlike SR-MPLS or SRv6. | underlying data plane used in the transport network (L2/IPv4/IPv6/ | |||
| This is achieved by: | MPLS). This is achieved by: | |||
| o For 3 different SSTs, 3 PPR-IDs can be signaled from any node in | o For 3 different SSTs, 3 PPR-IDs can be signaled from any node in | |||
| the transport network. For Uplink traffic, the 5G-AN will choose | the transport network. For Uplink traffic, the 5G-AN will choose | |||
| the right PPR-ID of the UPF based on the S-NSSAI the PDU Session | the right PPR-ID of the UPF based on the S-NSSAI the PDU Session | |||
| belongs to and/or the QFI (e.g. 5QI) marking on the GTP-U | belongs to and/or the UDP Source port (corresponds to the MTNC-ID | |||
| encapsulation header. Similarly in the Downlink direction | Section 2.5) of the GTP-U encapsulation header. Similarly in the | |||
| matching PPR-ID of the 5G-AN is chosen based on the S-NSSAI the | Downlink direction matching PPR-ID of the 5G-AN is chosen based on | |||
| PDU Session belongs to. The table below shows a typical mapping: | the S-NSSAI the PDU Session belongs to. The table below shows a | |||
| typical mapping: | ||||
| +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | +----------------+------------+------------------+-----------------+ | |||
| | QFI (Ranges) | SST | Transport Path | Transport Path | | |GTP/UDP SRC PORT| SST | Transport Path | Transport Path | | |||
| | | in S-NSSAI | 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 | | | | | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 28 ¶ | |||
| | 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 3: QFI Mapping with PPR-IDs on N3/N9 | Figure 2: Mapping of 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 5G-ANs | o Same set of PPRs are created uniformly across all needed 5G-ANs | |||
| and 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, and/ | ingress points. Same information can be pushed to the NSSF, and/ | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 9 ¶ | skipping to change at page 16, line 9 ¶ | |||
| 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 Section 5.3.7 of | |||
| Section 5.3.7 of [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. PPR | [I-D.bogineni-dmm-optimized-mobile-user-plane]. PPR also expands the | |||
| also expands the source routing to user planes beyond SR-MPLS and | source routing to user planes beyond SR-MPLS and SRv6 i.e., L2, | |||
| SRv6 i.e., native IPv6 and IPv4 user planes. | native IPv6 and IPv4 user planes. | |||
| This helps legacy transport networks to get the immediate path | This helps legacy transport networks to get the immediate path | |||
| steering benefits and helps in overall migration strategy of the | steering benefits and helps in overall migration strategy of the | |||
| network to the desired user plane. It is important to note, these | network to the desired user plane. Some of these benefits with PPR | |||
| benefits can be realized with no hardware upgrade except control | can be realized with no hardware upgrade except control plane | |||
| plane software for native IPv6 and IPv4 user planes. | software for native IPv6 and IPv4 user planes. | |||
| 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay | 3.3. Service Level Guarantee in Underlay | |||
| PPR also optionally allows to allocate resources that are to be | PPR also optionally allows to allocate resources that are to be | |||
| reserved along the preferred path. These resources are required in | reserved along the preferred path. These resources are required in | |||
| some cases (for some 5G SSTs with stringent GBR and latency | some cases (for some 5G SSTs with stringent GBR and latency | |||
| 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 45 ¶ | |||
| 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 | |||
| [ATIS075] Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS), | ||||
| "IOT Categorization: Exploring the Need for Standardizing | ||||
| Additional Network Slices ATIS-I-0000075", September 2019. | ||||
| [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., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Clad, F., and P. | Francois, P., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d., Clad, F., and P. | |||
| Camarillo, "Topology Independent Fast Reroute using | Camarillo, "Topology Independent Fast Reroute using | |||
| Segment Routing", draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti- | Segment Routing", draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti- | |||
| lfa-05 (work in progress), October 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] | |||
| 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-03 (work in | draft-chunduri-lsr-isis-preferred-path-routing-04 (work in | |||
| progress), May 2019. | progress), July 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-03 (work in | chunduri-lsr-ospf-preferred-path-routing-03 (work in | |||
| progress), May 2019. | progress), May 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-05 (work in progress), March 2019. | network-06 (work in progress), September 2019. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis] | [I-D.ietf-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis] | |||
| Homma, S., Miyasaka, T., Matsushima, S., and d. | Homma, S., Miyasaka, T., Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, | |||
| daniel.voyer@bell.ca, "User Plane Protocol and | "User Plane Protocol and Architectural Analysis on 3GPP 5G | |||
| Architectural Analysis on 3GPP 5G System", draft-ietf-dmm- | System", draft-ietf-dmm-5g-uplane-analysis-02 (work in | |||
| 5g-uplane-analysis-02 (work in progress), July 2019. | progress), July 2019. | |||
| [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 | Voyer, D., and C. Perkins, "Segment Routing IPv6 for | |||
| IPv6 for Mobile User Plane", draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile- | Mobile User Plane", draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-06 | |||
| uplane-05 (work in progress), July 2019. | (work in progress), September 2019. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-intarea-gue-extensions] | [I-D.ietf-intarea-gue-extensions] | |||
| Herbert, T., Yong, L., and F. Templin, "Extensions for | Herbert, T., Yong, L., and F. Templin, "Extensions for | |||
| Generic UDP Encapsulation", draft-ietf-intarea-gue- | Generic UDP Encapsulation", draft-ietf-intarea-gue- | |||
| extensions-06 (work in progress), March 2019. | extensions-06 (work in progress), March 2019. | |||
| [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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 21, line 32 ¶ | |||
| The management plane functionality also provides the mapping of such | The management plane functionality also provides the mapping of such | |||
| TE paths to a network instance identifier to the SMF. The SMF uses | TE paths to a network instance identifier to the SMF. The SMF uses | |||
| this mapping to install appropriate FARs in the UPF. This approach | this mapping to install appropriate FARs in the UPF. This approach | |||
| provide partial integration of the transport network into 5GS with | provide partial integration of the transport network into 5GS with | |||
| some benefits. | some benefits. | |||
| One of the limitations of this approach is the inability of the 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 during a N2 mobility event, without | be, a target 5G-AN selection during a N2 mobility event, without | |||
| knowing if the target gNB is having a underlay transport slice | knowing if the target 5G-AN is having a underlay transport slice | |||
| resource for the S-NSSAI and 5QI of the PDU session. The Integrated | resource for the S-NSSAI and 5QI of the PDU session. The Integrated | |||
| approach specified below can mitigate this. | approach specified below can mitigate this. | |||
| Appendix B. PPR with various 5G Mobility procedures | Appendix B. 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 5G-AN to UPF in all 3 SSC modes defined [TS.23.501-3GPP]. This | from 5G-AN to UPF in all 3 SSC modes defined [TS.23.501-3GPP]. This | |||
| is 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 across the 5G-AN (e.g. from one gNB to another gNB), there | UE moves across the 5G-AN (e.g. from one gNB to another gNB), there | |||
| is no transport network reconfiguration required with the approach | is no transport network reconfiguration required with the approach | |||
| above. | 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. | |||
| B.1. SSC Mode1 | B.1. SSC Mode1 | |||
| +---+----+ +-----+ +----------------+ | ||||
| | AMF | | TNF | | SMF | | +--------------+ | |||
| +---+--+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+--------------+ | +---+----+ |NSSMF +-----+ | +----------------+ | |||
| N1 | | | | | | AMF | | | TNF | | | SMF | | |||
| +---+--+-+ | +-+-+-+ | +-+--------------+ | ||||
| N1 | +--------+-+---+ | | ||||
| | | | | | | ||||
| +--------+ N2 +----Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 | +--------+ N2 +----Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| + +---+---+ +--++ +-+--+---+ +----+ | + +---+---+ +--++ +-+--+---+ +----+ | |||
| UE1 |gNB+======+CSR+------N3-----+ UPF +-N6--+ DN | | UE1 |gNB|======|CSR|------N3---- | PE+UPF |-N6--| DN | | |||
| == +---+ +---+ +--------+ +----+ | == +---+ +---+ +--------+ +----+ | |||
| Figure 4: SSC Mode1 with integrated Transport Slice Function | Figure 3: SSC Mode1 with integrated Transport Slice Function | |||
| After UE1 moved to another gNB in the same UPF serving area | After UE1 moved to another gNB in the same UPF serving area | |||
| +---+----+ +-----+ +----------------+ | +--------------+ | |||
| | AMF | | TNF | | SMF | | +---+----+ |NSSMF +-----+ | +----------------+ | |||
| +---_--+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+--------------+ | | AMF | | | TNF | | | SMF | | |||
| +---+--+-+ | +-+-+-+ | +-+--------------+ | ||||
| | +--------+-+---+ | | ||||
| | | | | | | | | | | |||
| N2 +----Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 | N2 +----Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | |||
| +----+--+ +-+-+ ++--+----+ +----+ | +----+--+ +-+-+ ++--+----+ +----+ | |||
| |gNB1+======+CSR+------N3-----+ UPF +-N6--+ DN | | |gNB1|======|CSR|------N3-----| PE+UPF |-N6--| DN | | |||
| +----+ +---+ +---+----+ +----+ | +----+ +---+ +---+----+ +----+ | |||
| | | | | |||
| | | | | |||
| | | | | |||
| | | | | |||
| +----+ +--++ | | +----+ +--++ | | |||
| UE1 |gNB2+======+CSR+------N3--------+ | UE1 |gNB2|======|CSR|------N3--------+ | |||
| == +----+ +---+ | == +----+ +---+ | |||
| Figure 5: 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, | |||
| source gNB has to additionally ensure transport path's resources from | source gNB has to additionally ensure transport path's resources from | |||
| TNF are available at the target gNB apart from radio resources check | TNF are available at the target gNB apart from radio resources check | |||
| (at decision and request phase of Xn/N2 mobility scenario). | (at decision and request phase of Xn/N2 mobility scenario). | |||
| B.2. SSC Mode2 | B.2. SSC Mode2 | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 24, line 5 ¶ | |||
| Sessions. | Sessions. | |||
| o Change of SSC Mode 3 PDU Session Anchor with IPv6 multi-homed PDU | o Change of SSC Mode 3 PDU Session Anchor with IPv6 multi-homed PDU | |||
| Session. | Session. | |||
| In the first mode, from user plane perspective, the two PDU sessions | 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 | are independent and the use of PPR-ID by gNB and UPFs is exactly | |||
| similar to SSC Mode 1 described above. The following paragraphs | similar to SSC Mode 1 described above. The following paragraphs | |||
| describe the IPv6 multi-homed PDU session case for SSC Mode 3. | describe the IPv6 multi-homed PDU session case for SSC Mode 3. | |||
| +---+----+ +-----+ +----------------+ | +--------------+ | |||
| | AMF | | TNF | | SMF | | +---+----+ |NSSMF +-----+ | +----------------+ | |||
| +---+--+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-----------+--+ | | AMF | | | TNF | | | SMF | | |||
| +---+--+-+ | +-+-+-+ | +-+-----------+--+ | ||||
| | | +--------+-+---+ | | | ||||
| N1 | | | | | | N1 | | | | | | |||
| to-UE+----+ N2 +-------Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 N4| | to-UE+----+ N2 +------Ns---+ +-Nn-+ N4 N4| | |||
| | | | | | | +---+ | | | | | |||
| +-------+--+ +--+-------+--+ +-----+-+ | | | | | | | |||
| |gNB/CSR +---N3---+ BP UPF +-N9--+ UPF +-N6-- | +---+ +---++ +--+-------+--+ +---+---+ | |||
| +----------+ +----------+--+ +-------+ to DN | |gNB|===|CSR |---N3---| PE+BP UPF |-N9--| PE+UPF|-N6-> | |||
| +---+ +----+ +----------+--+ +-------+ to DN | ||||
| | +----+ | | +----+ | |||
| +-| DN | | +-| DN | | |||
| N6 +----+ | N6 +----+ | |||
| Figure 6: SSC Mode3 and Service Continuity | Figure 5: SSC Mode3 and Service Continuity | |||
| In the uplink direction for the traffic offloading from the Branching | In the uplink direction for the traffic offloading from the Branching | |||
| Point UPF, packet has to reach to the right exit UPF. In this case | Point UPF, packet has to reach to the right exit UPF. In this case | |||
| packet gets re-encapsulated by the BP UPF (with either GTP-U or the | packet gets re-encapsulated by the BP UPF (with either GTP-U or the | |||
| chosen encapsulation) after bit rate enforcement and LI, towards the | chosen encapsulation) after bit rate enforcement and LI, towards the | |||
| anchor UPF. At this point packet has to be on the appropriate VPN/PW | anchor UPF. At this point packet has to be on the appropriate VPN/PW | |||
| to the anchor UPF. This mapping is done based on the S-NSSAI the PDU | to the anchor UPF. This mapping is done based on the S-NSSAI the PDU | |||
| session belongs to and/or the QFI marking in the GTPU encapsulation | session belongs to and/or with the UDP source port (corresponds to | |||
| header (e.g. 5QI value) to the PPR-ID of the exit node by selecting | the MTNC-ID Section 2.5) of the GTP-U encapsulation header to the | |||
| the respective TE PPR-ID (PPR path) of the UPF. If it's a non-MPLS | PPR-ID of the exit node by selecting the respective TE PPR-ID (PPR | |||
| underlay, destination IP address of the encapsulation header would be | path) of the UPF. If it's a non-MPLS underlay, destination IP | |||
| the mapped PPR-ID (TE path). | 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 UPF. Here mapping is done based on | encapsulation) to reach the BP UPF. Here mapping is done based on | |||
| the S-NSSAI the PDU session belongs, to the PPR-ID (TE Path) of the | the S-NSSAI the PDU session belongs, to the PPR-ID (TE Path) of the | |||
| BP UPF. If it's a non-MPLS underlay, destination IP address of the | BP UPF. If it's a non-MPLS underlay, destination IP address of 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 24, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 25, line 27 ¶ | |||
| Email: umac.ietf@gmail.com | Email: umac.ietf@gmail.com | |||
| Richard Li | Richard Li | |||
| Futurewei | Futurewei | |||
| 2330 Central Expressway | 2330 Central Expressway | |||
| Santa Clara, CA 95050 | Santa Clara, CA 95050 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: richard.li@futurewei.com | Email: richard.li@futurewei.com | |||
| Sridhar Bhaskaran | Sridhar Bhaskaran | |||
| Altiostar | Altiostar | |||
| Email: sridhar.bhaskaran@gmail.com | Email: sridharb@altiostar.com | |||
| John Kaippallimalil | ||||
| Futurewei | ||||
| Email: john.kaippallimalil@futurewei.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 | Praveen Muley | |||
| Nokia | Nokia | |||
| 440 North Bernardo Ave | 440 North Bernardo Ave | |||
| Mountain View, CA 94043 | Mountain View, CA 94043 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: praveen.muley@nokia.com | Email: praveen.muley@nokia.com | |||
| John Kaippallimalil | ||||
| Futurewei | ||||
| 5700 Tennyson Parkway, Suite 600 | ||||
| Plano, TX 75024 | ||||
| USA | ||||
| Email: john.kaippallimalil@futurewei.com | ||||
| End of changes. 68 change blocks. | ||||
| 378 lines changed or deleted | 448 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/ | ||||