CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs
draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment-03

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (opsawg WG)
Last updated 2013-10-07 (latest revision 2013-06-27)
Replaces draft-kuarsingh-lsn-deployment
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Melinda Shore
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2013-09-29)
IESG IESG state AD Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD BenoƮt Claise
Send notices to opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment@tools.ietf.org
OPSAWG                                                 V. Kuarsingh, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                             J. Cianfarani
Intended status: Informational                     Rogers Communications
Expires: December 29, 2013                                 June 27, 2013

                  CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs
                  draft-ietf-opsawg-lsn-deployment-03

Abstract

   This document specifies a framework to integrate a Network Address
   Translation layer into an operator's network to function as a Carrier
   Grade NAT (also known as CGN or Large Scale NAT).  The CGN
   infrastructure will often form a NAT444 environment as the subscriber
   home network will likely also maintain a subscriber side NAT
   function.  Exhaustion of the IPv4 address pool is a major driver
   compelling some operators to implement CGN.  Although operators may
   wish to deploy IPv6 to strategically overcome IPv4 exhaustion, near
   term needs may not be satisfied with an IPv6 deployment alone.  This
   document provides a practical integration model which allows the CGN
   platform to be integrated into the network meeting the connectivity
   needs of the subscriber while being mindful of not disrupting
   existing services and meeting the technical challenges that CGN
   brings.  The model included in this document utilizes BGP/MPLS IP
   VPNs which allow for virtual routing separation helping ease the CGNs
   impact on the network.  This document does not intend to defend the
   merits of CGN.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 29, 2013.

Copyright Notice

Kuarsingh & Cianfarani  Expires December 29, 2013               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs         June 2013

   Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Motivation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  CGN Network Deployment Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Centralized versus Distributed Deployment . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  CGN and Traditional IPv4 Service Co-existence . . . . . .   6
     3.3.  CGN By-Pass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.4.  Routing Plane Separation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.5.  Flexible Deployment Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.6.  IPv4 Overlap Space  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.7.  Transactional Logging for LSN Systems . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.8.  Additional CGN Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   4.  BGP/MPLS IP VPN based CGN Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.1.  Service Separation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.2.  Internal Service Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       4.2.1.  Dual Stack Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.3.  Deployment Flexibility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     4.4.  Comparison of BGP/MPLS IP VPN Option versus other CGN
           Attachment Options  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       4.4.1.  Policy Based Routing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
       4.4.2.  Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
       4.4.3.  Multiple Routing Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     4.5.  Multicast Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   5.  Experiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.1.  Basic Integration and Requirements Support  . . . . . . .  15
     5.2.  Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
Show full document text