idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC3316]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (March 27, 2013) is 4049 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3633 (Obsoleted by RFC 8415) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3736 (Obsoleted by RFC 8415) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4941 (Obsoleted by RFC 8981) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6106 (Obsoleted by RFC 8106) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6145 (Obsoleted by RFC 7915) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6434 (Obsoleted by RFC 8504) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6555 (Obsoleted by RFC 8305) == Outdated reference: A later version (-17) exists of draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-16 == Outdated reference: A later version (-11) exists of draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-02 == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-10) exists of draft-ietf-v6ops-64share-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis-01 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3316 (Obsoleted by RFC 7066) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 6204 (Obsoleted by RFC 7084) Summary: 8 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 V6OPS Working Group D. Binet 3 Internet-Draft M. Boucadair 4 Intended status: Informational France Telecom 5 Expires: September 28, 2013 A. Vizdal 6 Deutsche Telekom AG 7 C. Byrne 8 T-Mobile 9 G. Chen 10 China Mobile 11 March 27, 2013 13 Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for Mobile Devices 14 draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-01 16 Abstract 18 This document specifies an IPv6 profile for mobile devices. It lists 19 the set of features a mobile device is to be compliant with to 20 connect to an IPv6-only or dual-stack mobile network. 22 This document defines a different profile than the one for general 23 connection to IPv6 mobile networks defined in [RFC3316]. In 24 particular, this document identifies also features to ensure IPv4 25 service continuity over an IPv6-only transport. 27 Both Hosts and devices with LAN capabilities are in scope. 29 Status of This Memo 31 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 32 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 34 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 35 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 36 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 37 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 39 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 40 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 41 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 42 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 44 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 28, 2013. 46 Copyright Notice 47 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 48 document authors. All rights reserved. 50 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 51 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 52 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 53 publication of this document. Please review these documents 54 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 55 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 56 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 57 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 58 described in the Simplified BSD License. 60 Table of Contents 62 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 63 1.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 1.2. Special Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 2. Connectivity Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 2.1. WiFi Connectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 67 3. Advanced Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 68 4. Cellular Devices with LAN Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . 10 69 5. APIs & Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 70 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 71 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 72 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 73 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 74 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 75 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 76 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 78 1. Introduction 80 IPv6 deployment in mobile networks is the only perennial solution to 81 the exhaustion of IPv4 addresses in those networks. Several mobile 82 operators already deployed IPv6 or are in the pre-deployment phase. 83 One of the major hurdles encountered by mobile operators is the 84 availability of non-broken IPv6 implementation in mobile devices. 85 Some vendors are already proposing some mobile devices with a set of 86 IPv6 features, but the majority of devices are still lacking IPv6 87 support. 89 [RFC3316] lists a set of features to be supported by cellular hosts 90 to connect to 3GPP cellular networks. Since the publication of that 91 document, new functions have been specified within the 3GPP and the 92 IETF whilst others have been updated. Moreover, in the light of 93 recent IPv6 production deployments, additional features to facilitate 94 IPv6-only deployments while accessing IPv4-only service are to be 95 considered. 97 This document defines a different profile than the one for general 98 connection to IPv6 mobile networks defined in [RFC3316]; in 99 particular: 101 o It lists an extended list of required features while 102 [I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis] identifies issues and explains how to 103 implement basic IPv6 features in a mobile context. 105 o It identifies also features to ensure IPv4 service continuity over 106 an IPv6-only transport. 108 This document specifies an IPv6 profile for mobile devices listing 109 required specifications produced by various SDOs (in particular 3GPP 110 and IETF). The objectives of this effort are: 112 1. List in one single document all requirements a mobile device is 113 to comply with to connect to an IPv6 or dual stack mobile 114 network. These requirements cover various network types such as 115 GPRS, EPC or Wi-Fi network. 117 2. Help Operators with the detailed device requirement list 118 preparation (to be exchanged with device suppliers). This is 119 also a contribution to harmonize Operators' requirements towards 120 device vendors. 122 3. Vendors to be aware of a minimal set of requirements to allow for 123 IPv6 connectivity and IPv4 service continuity (over an IPv6- only 124 transport). 126 Pointers to some requirements listed in [RFC6434] are included in 127 this profile. The justification for using a stronger language 128 compared to what is specified in [RFC6434] is provided for some 129 requirements. 131 Some of the features listed in this profile document require to 132 activate dedicated functions at the network side. It is out of scope 133 of this document to list these network-side functions. 135 A detailed overview of IPv6 support in 3GPP architectures is provided 136 in [RFC6459]. 138 This document makes use of the terms defined in [RFC6459]. 140 PREFIX64 denotes an IPv6 prefix used to build IPv4-converted IPv6 141 addresses [RFC6052]. 143 1.1. Scope 145 Various types of nodes can be connected to 3GPP networks requiring 146 specific functions. Indeed, a 3GPP network can be used to connect 147 user equipment such as a mobile telephone, a CPE or a machine-to- 148 machine (M2M) device. Because of this diversity of terminals, it is 149 necessary to define a set of IPv6 functionalities valid for any node 150 directly connecting to a 3GPP network. This document describes these 151 functionalities. 153 This document is structured to initially provide the generic IPv6 154 requirements which are valid for all nodes, whatever their function 155 or service (e.g., SIP [RFC3261]) capability. The document also 156 contains, dedicated sections covering specific functionalities the 157 specific device types must support (e.g., smartphones, devices 158 providing some LAN functions (mobile CPE or broadband dongles)). 160 M2M devices profile is out of scope. 162 The requirements listed below are valid for both 3GPP GPRS and 3GPP 163 EPS access. For EPS, "PDN type" terminology is used instead of "PDP 164 context". 166 1.2. Special Language 168 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 169 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 170 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 172 This document is not a standard. It uses the normative keywords only 173 for precision. 175 2. Connectivity Requirements 177 REQ#1: The cellular host MUST be compliant with Section 5.9.1 (IPv6 178 Addressing Architecture) and Section 5.8 (ICMPv6 support) of 179 [RFC6434]. 181 REQ#2: The cellular host MUST support both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP 182 Contexts. 184 This allows each operator to select their own strategy 185 regarding IPv6 introduction. Both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP 186 contexts MUST be supported in addition to the IPv4 PDP 187 context. IPv4, IPv6 or IPv4v6 PDP-Context request acceptance 188 depends on the mobile network configuration. 190 REQ#3: The cellular host MUST comply with the behavior defined in 191 [TS.23060] [TS.23401] [TS.24008] for requesting a PDP context 192 type. In particular, the cellular host MUST request an IPv6 PDP 193 context if the cellular host is IPv6-only and requesting an 194 IPv4v6 PDP context if the cellular host is dual stack or when 195 the cellular host is not aware of connectivity types requested 196 by devices connected to it (e.g., cellular host with LAN 197 capabilities): 199 * If the requested IPv4v6 PDP context is not supported by the 200 network, but IPv4 and IPv6 PDP types are allowed, then the 201 cellular host will be configured with an IPv4 address and/or 202 an IPv6 prefix by the network. It MAY initiate another PDP 203 request in addition to the one already activated for a given 204 APN. 206 * If the requested PDP type and subscription data allows only 207 one IP address family (IPv4 or IPv6), the cellular host MUST 208 NOT request a second PDP context to the same APN for the 209 other IP address family. 211 The text above focuses on the specification part which explains 212 the behavior for requesting IPv6-related PDP context(s). 213 Understanding this behavior is important to avoid having broken 214 IPv6 implementations in cellular devices. 216 REQ#4: The cellular host MUST support the PCO (Protocol 217 Configuration Options) [TS.24008] to retrieve the IPv6 218 address(es) of the Recursive DNS server(s). 220 In-band signaling is a convenient method to inform the 221 cellular host about various services, including DNS server 222 information. It does not require any specific protocol to be 223 supported and it is already deployed in IPv4 cellular 224 networks to convey such DNS information. 226 REQ#5: The cellular host MUST support IPv6 aware Traffic Flow 227 Templates (TFT) [TS.24008]. 229 Traffic Flow Templates are employing a Packet Filter to 230 couple an IP traffic with a PDP-Context. Thus a dedicated 231 PDP-Context and radio resources can be provided by the mobile 232 network for certain IP traffic. 234 REQ#6: The device MUST support the Neighbor Discovery Protocol 235 ([RFC4861] and [RFC5942]). 237 This is a stronger form compared to what is specified in 238 Section 12.2 of [RFC6434]. The support of Neighbor Discovery 239 Protocol is mandatory in mobile environment as it is the only 240 way to convey IPv6 prefix towards the mobile device. 242 In particular, MTU communication via Router Advertisement 243 SHOULD be supported since many 3GPP networks do not have a 244 standard MTU setting due to inconsistencies in GTP [RFC3314] 245 mobility tunnel infrastructure deployments. 247 REQ#8: The cellular host MUST support IPv6 Stateless Address 248 Autoconfiguration ([RFC4862]) apart from the exceptions noted in 249 [TS.23060] (3G) and [TS.23401] (LTE): 251 Stateless mode is the only way to configure a cellular host. 252 The GGSN must allocate a prefix that is unique within its 253 scope to each primary PDP context. 255 The cellular host MUST use the interface identifier sent in 256 PDP Context Accept message to configure its link local 257 address. The cellular host may use a different Interface 258 Identifiers to configure its global addresses. 260 REQ#9: The cellular host must comply with Section 7.3 of [RFC6434]. 262 The support of Router Advertisement Options for DNS 263 configuration allows for a consistent method of informing 264 cellular hosts about DNS recursive servers across various 265 types of access networks. The cellular host SHOULD support 266 RA-based DNS information discovery. 268 REQ#10: The cellular host must comply with Section 7.2.1 of 269 [RFC6434]. 271 Stateless DHCPv6 is useful to retrieve other information than 272 DNS. 274 If [RFC6106] is not supported, the cellular host SHOULD 275 retrieve DNS information using stateless DHCPv6 [RFC3736]. 277 If the cellular host receives the DNS information in several 278 channels for the same interface, the following preference 279 order MUST be followed: 281 1. PCP 282 2. RA 284 3. DHCPv6 286 REQ#11: The cellular host SHOULD support a method to locally 287 construct IPv4-embedded IPv6 addresses [RFC6052]. A method to 288 learn PREFIX64 SHOULD be supported by the cellular host. 290 This solves the issue when applications use IPv4 referrals on 291 IPv6-only access networks. 293 In PCP-based environments, cellular hosts SHOULD follow 294 [I-D.ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64] to learn the IPv6 Prefix used 295 by an upstream PCP-controlled NAT64 device. If PCP is not 296 enabled, the cellular host SHOULD implement the method 297 specified in [I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic] to 298 retrieve the PREFIX64. 300 REQ#12: The cellular host SHOULD implement the Customer Side 301 Translator (CLAT, [I-D.ietf-v6ops-464xlat]) function which is 302 compliant with [RFC6052][RFC6145][RFC6146]. 304 CLAT function in the cellular host allows for IPv4-only 305 application and IPv4-referals to work on an IPv6-only PDP. 306 CLAT function requires a NAT64 capability [RFC6146] in the 307 core network. 309 REQ#13: The cellular device SHOULD embed a DNS64 function [RFC6147]. 311 Local DNS64 functionality allows for compatibility with 312 DNSSEC. Means to configure or discover a PREFIX64 is also 313 required on the cellular device. 315 REQ#14: The cellular host SHOULD support PCP [I-D.ietf-pcp-base]. 317 The support of PCP is seen as a driver to save battery 318 consumption exacerbated by keepalive messages. PCP also 319 gives the possibility of enabling incoming connections to the 320 user. Indeed, because several stateful devices may be 321 deployed in mobile networks (e.g., NAT and/or Firewalls), PCP 322 can be used by the cellular host to control network based NAT 323 and Firewall functions which will reduce per-application 324 signaling and save battery consumption. 326 REQ#15: When the cellular host is dual stack connected, it SHOULD 327 support means to prefer native IPv6 connection over connection 328 established through translation devices (e.g., NAT44 and NAT64). 330 Cellular hosts SHOULD follow the procedure specified in 331 [RFC6724] for source address selection. 333 Some potential issues are discussed in 334 [I-D.ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension] for MIFed devices. 336 REQ#16: The cellular host SHOULD support Happy Eyeballs procedure 337 defined in [RFC6555]. 339 REQ#17: The cellular host SHOULD NOT perform Duplicate Address 340 Detection (DAD) for these Global IPv6 addresses (as the GGSN or 341 PDN-GW must not configure any IPv6 addresses using the prefix 342 allocated to the cellular host). Refer to Section 4 for DAD 343 considerations on the LAN interface when the 3GPP connection is 344 shared. 346 REQ#18: The cellular device MAY embed a BIH function [RFC6535] 347 facilitating the communication between an IPv4 application and 348 an IPv6 server. 350 2.1. WiFi Connectivity 352 It is increasingly common for cellular hosts have a Wi-Fi interface 353 in addition to their cellular interface. These hosts are likely to 354 be connected to private or public hotspots. Below are listed some 355 generic requirements: 357 REQ#19: IPv6 MUST be supported on the Wi-Fi interface. In 358 particular, IPv6-only connectivity MUST be supported over the 359 Wi-Fi interface. 361 Recent tests revealed that IPv4 configuration is required 362 to enable IPv6-only connectivity. Indeed, some cellular 363 handsets can access a Wi-Fi IPv6-only network by 364 configuring first a static IPv4 address. Once the device 365 is connected to the network and the wlan0 interface got an 366 IPv6 global address, the IPv4 address can be deleted from 367 the configuration. This avoids the device to ask 368 automatically for a DHCPv4 server, and allows to connect to 369 IPv6-only networks. 371 IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration ([RFC4862]) MUST 372 be supported. 374 REQ#20: DHCPv6 client SHOULD be supported on Wi-Fi interface. 376 Refer to Section 7.2.1 of [RFC6434]. 378 REQ#21: Wi-Fi interface SHOULD support Router Advertisement Options 379 for DNS configuration (See Section Section 7.3 of [RFC6434]). 380 If the device receives the DNS information in several channels 381 for the same interface, the following preference order MUST be 382 followed: 384 1. RA 386 2. DHCPv6 388 3. Advanced Requirements 390 REQ#22: The cellular host must comply with Section 5.6.1 of 391 [RFC6434]. If the MTU used by cellular hosts is larger than 392 1280 bytes, they can rely on Path MTU discovery function to 393 discover the real path MTU. 395 REQ#23: The cellular host must comply with Section 5.9.3 of 396 [RFC6434] for the support of the Privacy Extensions for 397 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6. 399 The activation of privacy extension makes it more difficult 400 to track a host over time when compared to using a 401 permanent interface identifier. [RFC4941] does not require 402 any DAD mechanism to be activated as the GGSN (or PDN-GW) 403 MUST NOT configure any global address based on the prefix 404 allocated to the cellular host. 406 REQ#24: The cellular host SHOULD support ROHC for IPv6 ([RFC5795]). 408 Bandwidth in mobile environments must be optimized as much 409 as possible. ROHC provides a solution to reduce bandwidth 410 consumption and to reduce the impact of having bigger 411 packet headers in IPv6 compared to IPv4. 413 REQ#25: The cellular host SHOULD support IPv6 Router Advertisement 414 Flags Options ([RFC5175]). 416 This is a stronger form compared to what is specified in 417 [RFC6434]. The justification is some flags are used by the 418 GGSN (or PDN-GW) to inform cellular hosts about the 419 autoconfiguration process. 421 REQ#26: The cellular host must comply with Section 5.3 of [RFC6434] 422 and SHOULD support Router Advertisement extension for 423 communicating default router preferences and more-specific 424 routes as described in [RFC4191]. 426 This function can be used for instance for traffic offload. 428 4. Cellular Devices with LAN Capabilities 430 This section focuses on cellular devices (e.g., CPE, smartphones or 431 dongles with tethering features) which provide IP connectivity to 432 other devices connected to them. In such case, all connected devices 433 are sharing the same GPRS, UMTS or EPS connection. In addition to 434 the generic requirements listed in Section 2, these cellular devices 435 have to meet the requirements listed below. 437 REQ#27: The cellular device MUST support Prefix Delegation 438 capabilities [RFC3633] and MUST support Prefix Exclude Option 439 for DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation as defined in [RFC6603]. 440 Particularly, it MUST behave as a Requesting Router. 442 Cellular networks are more and more perceived as an 443 alternative to fixed networks for home IP-based services 444 delivery; especially with the advent of smartphones and 445 3GPP data dongles. There is a need for an efficient 446 mechanism to assign shorter prefix than /64 to cellular 447 hosts so that each LAN segment can get its own /64 prefix 448 and multilink subnet issues to be avoided. 450 In case a prefix is delegated to a cellular host using 451 DHCPv6, the cellular device will be configured with two 452 prefixes: 454 (1) one for 3GPP link allocated using SLAAC mechanism 455 and 457 (2) another one delegated for LANs acquired during 458 Prefix Delegation operation. 460 Note that the 3GPP network architecture requires both the 461 WAN and the Delegated Prefix to be aggregatable, so the 462 subscriber can be identified using a single prefix. 464 Without the Prefix Exclude Option, the delegating router 465 (GGSN/PDN-GW) will have to ensure [RFC3633] compliancy 466 (e.g., halving the Delegated prefix and assigning the WAN 467 prefix out of the 1st half and the prefix to be delegated 468 to the terminal from the 2nd half). 470 REQ#28: The cellular device MUST be compliant with the CPE 471 requirements specified in [RFC6204]. 473 REQ#29: For deployments requiring to share the same /64 prefix, the 474 cellular device SHOULD support [I-D.ietf-v6ops-64share] to 475 enable sharing a /64 prefix between the 3GPP interface towards 476 the GGSN (WAN interface) and the LAN interfaces. 478 REQ#30: The cellular device SHOULD support the Customer Side 479 Translator (CLAT) [I-D.ietf-v6ops-464xlat]. 481 Various IP devices are likely to be connected to cellular 482 device, acting as a CPE. Some of these devices can be 483 dual-stack, others are IPv6-only or IPv4-only. IPv6-only 484 connectivity for cellular device does not allow IPv4-only 485 sessions to be established for hosts connected on the LAN 486 segment of cellular devices. 488 In order to allow IPv4 sessions establishment initiated 489 from devices located on LAN segment side and target IPv4 490 nodes, a solution consists in integrating the CLAT function 491 in the cellular device. As elaborated in Section 2, the 492 CLAT function allows also IPv4 applications to continue 493 running over an IPv6-only host. 495 REQ#31: If a RA MTU is advertised from the 3GPP network, the 496 cellular device SHOULD relay that upstream MTU information to 497 the downstream attached LAN devices in RA. 499 Since 3GPP networks extensively use IP-in-IP/UDP GTP 500 tunnels, the effective MTU is frequently effectively 501 reduced to 1440 bytes. While a host may generate packets 502 with an MTU of 1500 bytes, this results in undesirable 503 fragmentation of the GTP IP/UDP packets. 505 Receiving and relaying RA MTU values facilitates a more 506 harmonious functioning of the mobile core network where end 507 nodes transmit packets that do not exceed the MTU size of 508 the mobile network's GTP tunnels. 510 5. APIs & Applications 512 REQ#32: Name resolution libraries MUST support both IPv4 and IPv6. 514 In particular, the cellular host MUST support [RFC3596]. 516 REQ#33: Applications MUST be independent of the underlying IP 517 address family. 519 This means applications must be IP version agnostic. 521 REQ#34: Applications using URIs MUST follow [RFC3986]. For example, 522 SIP applications MUST follow the correction defined in 523 [RFC5954]. 525 6. Security Considerations 527 The security considerations identified in [RFC3316] are to be taken 528 into account. 530 REQ#35: If the cellular device provides LAN features, it SHOULD be 531 compliant with the security requirements specified in 532 [RFC6092]. 534 7. IANA Considerations 536 This document does not require any action from IANA. 538 8. Acknowledgements 540 Many thanks to H. Soliman, H. Singh, L. Colliti, T. Lemon, B. 541 Sarikaya, J. Korhonen, M. Mawatari, M. Abrahamsson, P. Vickers, 542 V. Kuarsingh, and J. Woodyatt for the discussion in the v6ops 543 mailing list. 545 9. References 547 9.1. Normative References 549 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 550 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 552 [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, 553 A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. 554 Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, 555 June 2002. 557 [RFC3596] Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi, 558 "DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6", RFC 3596, 559 October 2003. 561 [RFC3633] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic 562 Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, 563 December 2003. 565 [RFC3736] Droms, R., "Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol 566 (DHCP) Service for IPv6", RFC 3736, April 2004. 568 [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform 569 Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, RFC 570 3986, January 2005. 572 [RFC4191] Draves, R. and D. Thaler, "Default Router Preferences and 573 More-Specific Routes", RFC 4191, November 2005. 575 [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, 576 "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, 577 September 2007. 579 [RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless 580 Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007. 582 [RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy 583 Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in 584 IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007. 586 [RFC5175] Haberman, B. and R. Hinden, "IPv6 Router Advertisement 587 Flags Option", RFC 5175, March 2008. 589 [RFC5795] Sandlund, K., Pelletier, G., and L-E. Jonsson, "The RObust 590 Header Compression (ROHC) Framework", RFC 5795, March 591 2010. 593 [RFC5942] Singh, H., Beebee, W., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6 Subnet 594 Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet 595 Prefixes", RFC 5942, July 2010. 597 [RFC5954] Gurbani, V., Carpenter, B., and B. Tate, "Essential 598 Correction for IPv6 ABNF and URI Comparison in RFC 3261", 599 RFC 5954, August 2010. 601 [RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X. 602 Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052, 603 October 2010. 605 [RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli, 606 "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration", 607 RFC 6106, November 2010. 609 [RFC6145] Li, X., Bao, C., and F. Baker, "IP/ICMP Translation 610 Algorithm", RFC 6145, April 2011. 612 [RFC6146] Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful 613 NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6 614 Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011. 616 [RFC6147] Bagnulo, M., Sullivan, A., Matthews, P., and I. van 617 Beijnum, "DNS64: DNS Extensions for Network Address 618 Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6147, 619 April 2011. 621 [RFC6434] Jankiewicz, E., Loughney, J., and T. Narten, "IPv6 Node 622 Requirements", RFC 6434, December 2011. 624 [RFC6535] Huang, B., Deng, H., and T. Savolainen, "Dual-Stack Hosts 625 Using "Bump-in-the-Host" (BIH)", RFC 6535, February 2012. 627 [RFC6555] Wing, D. and A. Yourtchenko, "Happy Eyeballs: Success with 628 Dual-Stack Hosts", RFC 6555, April 2012. 630 [RFC6603] Korhonen, J., Savolainen, T., Krishnan, S., and O. Troan, 631 "Prefix Exclude Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix 632 Delegation", RFC 6603, May 2012. 634 [RFC6724] Thaler, D., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown, 635 "Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6 636 (IPv6)", RFC 6724, September 2012. 638 9.2. Informative References 640 [I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic] 641 Savolainen, T., Korhonen, J., and D. Wing, "Discovery of 642 the IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis", draft- 643 ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-16 (work in 644 progress), March 2013. 646 [I-D.ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension] 647 Chen, G., Williams, C., Wing, D., and A. Yourtchenko, 648 "Happy Eyeballs Extension for Multiple Interfaces", draft- 649 ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-02 (work in progress), 650 February 2013. 652 [I-D.ietf-pcp-base] 653 Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P. 654 Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", draft-ietf-pcp- 655 base-29 (work in progress), November 2012. 657 [I-D.ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64] 658 Boucadair, M., "Learn NAT64 PREFIX64s using PCP", draft- 659 ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-00 (work in progress), February 660 2013. 662 [I-D.ietf-v6ops-464xlat] 663 Mawatari, M., Kawashima, M., and C. Byrne, "464XLAT: 664 Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation", draft- 665 ietf-v6ops-464xlat-10 (work in progress), February 2013. 667 [I-D.ietf-v6ops-64share] 668 Byrne, C., Drown, D., and V. Ales, "Extending an IPv6 /64 669 Prefix from a 3GPP Mobile Interface to a LAN", draft-ietf- 670 v6ops-64share-03 (work in progress), February 2013. 672 [I-D.ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis] 673 Korhonen, J., Arkko, J., Savolainen, T., and S. Krishnan, 674 "IPv6 for 3GPP Cellular Hosts", draft-ietf-v6ops- 675 rfc3316bis-01 (work in progress), February 2013. 677 [RFC3314] Wasserman, M., "Recommendations for IPv6 in Third 678 Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Standards", RFC 679 3314, September 2002. 681 [RFC3316] Arkko, J., Kuijpers, G., Soliman, H., Loughney, J., and J. 682 Wiljakka, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) for Some 683 Second and Third Generation Cellular Hosts", RFC 3316, 684 April 2003. 686 [RFC6092] Woodyatt, J., "Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in 687 Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for Providing 688 Residential IPv6 Internet Service", RFC 6092, January 689 2011. 691 [RFC6204] Singh, H., Beebee, W., Donley, C., Stark, B., and O. 692 Troan, "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge 693 Routers", RFC 6204, April 2011. 695 [RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, T., 696 Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation 697 Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)", 698 RFC 6459, January 2012. 700 [TS.23060] 701 3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service 702 description; Stage 2", September 2011. 704 [TS.23401] 705 3GPP, , "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements 706 for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network 707 (E-UTRAN) access", September 2011. 709 [TS.24008] 710 3GPP, , "Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification; 711 Core network protocols; Stage 3", June 2011. 713 Authors' Addresses 715 David Binet 716 France Telecom 717 Rennes 718 France 720 Email: david.binet@orange.com 722 Mohamed Boucadair 723 France Telecom 724 Rennes 35000 725 France 727 Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com 729 Ales Vizdal 730 Deutsche Telekom AG 732 Email: ales.vizdal@t-mobile.cz 734 Cameron Byrne 735 T-Mobile 736 USA 738 Email: Cameron.Byrne@T-Mobile.com 740 Gang Chen 741 China Mobile 743 Email: phdgang@gmail.com