Network Working Group M. Boucadair, Ed.
Internet-Draft P. Levis
Intended status: Informational J-L. Grimault
Expires: January 14, 2010 A. Villefranque
M. Kassi-Lahlou
France Telecom
July 13, 2009
Flexible IPv6 Migration Scenarios in the Context of IPv4 Address
Shortage
draft-boucadair-behave-ipv6-portrange-02
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material
from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly
available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the
copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF
Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the
IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from
the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this
document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and
derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards
Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to
translate it into languages other than English.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract
This memo presents a solution to solve IPv4 address shortage and ease
IPv4-IPv6 interworking. The document presents a set of incremental
steps for the deployment of IPv6 as a means to solve IPv4 address
exhaustion. Stateless IPv4/IPv6 address mapping functions are
introduced and IPv4-IPv6 interconnection scenarios presented. This
memo advocates for a more proactive approach for the deployment of
IPv6 into operational networks.
This document provides the specification of the solution and
deployment scenarios together with IPv6 migrations paths.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1. IPv4 Address Exhaustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2. To what extent does IPv6 solve the problem? . . . . . . . 5
1.3. Towards a proactive approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4. Contribution of this draft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.5. Positioning this Draft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3. Reminder of the Port Range Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. IPv6-IPv4 Address Mapping Formalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1. IPv6 Prefix: Another IPv4-mapped Prefix Scheme . . . . . . 10
4.2. IPv4 to IPv6 Address Mapping Function . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.2.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.2.2. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.3. IPv6 to IPv4 Address Mapping Function . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.3.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.3.2. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. Stateless A+P Mapping Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.1. Stateless A+P Mapping gateway (SMAP) Function
description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2. Implementation modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.2.1. SMAP to route incoming traffic destined to a
shared IPv4 address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.2.2. No IPv4 capabilities are used anymore between two
SMAP-enabled nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3. Deployment Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.4. SMAP and PRR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6. IPv6 Migration Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.2. IPv6 Prefixes and Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.3. On Stateless and Binding Table Modes . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.3.1. Stateless Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.3.2. Binding Table Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.4. Step_0: IPv6 at Access Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.4.1. Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.4.2. Overall Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.4.3. Focus on Communication Establishment . . . . . . . . . 26
6.4.4. Typical Flow Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.5. Step_1: IPv6 a Means to Transfer Incoming IPv4 Packets . . 28
6.5.1. Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.5.2. Overall Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.6. Step_2: Only IPv6 Is Used For Both Incoming and
Outgoing Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.6.1. Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.6.2. The IPv6 Encapsulation-Based Mode . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.6.3. The IPv6 Translation-Based Mode . . . . . . . . . . . 37
6.7. Analysis and IPv6 Migration Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . 42
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
1. Introduction
1.1. IPv4 Address Exhaustion
It is commonly agreed by the Internet community that the exhaustion
of public IPv4 addresses is an ineluctable fact. Regular alarms and
reports have been emitted by the IETF particularly by the reports
presented within the GROW working group (Global Routing Operations
Working Group) meetings.
G. Huston introduced an extrapolation model to forecast the
exhaustion date of IPv4 addresses managed by IANA. This effort
indicates that if the current tendency of consumption continues at
the same pace, IPv4 addresses exhaustion of IANA's pool would occur
in 2011, while RIRs'pool would be exhausted in mid-2012. The state
of the current consumption of public IPv4 addresses is daily updated
and is available at this URL:
http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/index.html.
1.2. To what extent does IPv6 solve the problem?
In this context, the community was mobilized in the past to adopt a
promising solution (in particular with the definition of IPv6). IPv6
has been introduced for several years as the next version of the IP
protocol. This new version offers an abundance of IP addresses as
well as several enhancements compared to IPv4. IPv6 specifications
are mature and current work within the IETF is related to operational
aspects. Despite this effort, IPv6 is not globally activated by
service providers for both financial and strategic reasons.
However, even if a service provider activates IPv6, it will be
confronted with the problem to ensure a global connectivity towards
nowadays Internet v4. Mechanisms such as NAT-PT (Network Address
Translation Protocol Translation) were introduced to ensure the
interconnection between two heterogeneous realms (i.e. IPv4/IPv6)
and to ensure a continuity of IP communications (i.e. End-to-end).
These solutions are statefull and are not suitable to interconnect an
IPv6 domain with a dominant Internet which is IPv4-only. Further
work should be undertaken with IETF to elaborate lightweight and
hopefully stateless solution to ease IPv4-IPv6 interworking.
Moreover, Service providers should adopt clear strategies so as to
ease the adoption of IPv6 and to decrease the complexity related to
IPv4-IPv6 interworking which is one of the critical issues to be
taken into account when designing service platforms.
Last, it is worth to mention that migrating to IPv6 is a service
provider issue and not the one of its customers. The ultimate
requirement of the customers (mainly residential and mass market) is
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
to benefit from a global IP connectivity. How this connectivity is
engineered and put into effect is of the business of the IP
connectivity service providers. Of course, some corporate customers
would specify the nature of their IP connectivity and reduce the
interconnection engineering complexity of their interconnection nodes
with the domain of their IP connectivity service provider(s). From
this standpoint, service providers should be more proactive in order
to avoid a crisis scenario where no IP addresses are available to be
assigned to their customers.
1.3. Towards a proactive approach
The introduction of IPv6 into public networks becomes a reality.
Several Internet providers have enabled IPv6 in their routers and
launched therefore their IPv6 migration operations. The portion of
the IPv6-enabled routers differs between SPs. The current trade is
that operators offer dual connectivity to their customers, i.e. IPv4
and IPv6 access. IPv4 connectivity usage should be gradually
decreased in favour of IPv6 one. This convergence phase towards a
pure IPv6 connectivity will take several years depending on the
policies adopted by service providers. For operators that adopt an
aggressive position with regards to the activation of IPv6, this
transition phase could be small compared to passive operators.
Nevertheless the overall Internet IPv6 coverage will be long. This
is due mainly to the significant number of involved actors to be
convinced for a full migration towards IPv6, the significant number
of existing ASes (more than 30000), etc. Moreover, customers do not
have any reason to modify their local architecture (e.g. a given
organisation does not have any motivations to migrate its FTP or HTTP
servers towards IPv6). Operators must expect a long work of
accompaniment for the migration towards IPv6. The final migration
towards IPv6 would take several years (at least 10 years).
This migration to IPv6 should be incremental and not implemented in
one shot. For these reasons, service providers should elaborate
migration scenarios so as to achieve a transparent migration. This
transparency is required because end-users should not be aware on the
underlying technology used to deliver their subscribed services and
the complexity related to service engineering should be hidden to
end-users. Furthermore, service providers should use means to
prioritise IPv6 traffic and the invocation of IPv6 transfer
capabilities without relying on end-users behaviour. IPv6 transfer
capabilities should be exploited and not considered as dormant ones.
If no proactive means/procedures are adopted, the ratio of IPv6
traffic will depend on the behaviour of end-users and also on
available IPv6 services.
Furthermore, in the perspective of IPv6 migration, the maintenance
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
and the operating of dual connectivity infrastructure would therefore
be required for a long period. This option is not to be encouraged
within service providers since it does not optimise both OPEX/CAPEX.
Both technical skills should be maintained within each individual
organisation. As an alternative, this document proposes a proactive
and incremental deployment approach which consists at:
- Activation of IPv6 and port range IPv4 solution at the same time.
Port-restricted devices are provisioned with an IPv6 prefix, a shared
IPv4 public address and a port range.
- Activation of stateless functions and use of IPv6 to carry IPv4
traffic from/to port-restricted devices.
- Migration to IPv6-only core network.
- Maintain stateless IPv4-IPv6 interworking functions at
interconnection segment to not alter intra-domain paths.
1.4. Contribution of this draft
This memo defines several solutions to solve the IPv4 address
shortage problem and to migrate to IPv6 without requiring stateful
nodes. The draft proposes also several migration paths. This target
IPv6 deployment is a long term objective and can be reached
incrementally through one or several intermediate steps. These
intermediate steps perimeters differ from a service provider to
another one depending on the service opportunities targeted by
enabling IPv6-related capabilities and also on the level of risks on
the already running services. Risks on existing services should be
assessed. Careful or aggressive position may be adopted by each
service provider. Service providers are free to deploy the step/the
migration path suitable to their context and objectives, etc. This
document only sketches scenarios and interconnection configurations.
Voluntarily, no frozen architecture is described. Several options
are supported.
This document provides:
o solution specification
o and deployment scenarios together with migrations paths.
1.5. Positioning this Draft
This draft proposes a solution to solve both IPv4 address exhaustion
and IPv4-IPv6 interconnection. Unlike
[I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite], no additional NAT is required to
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
be deployed at the service provider's network. Both encapsulation
and translation modes are presented in this memo.
A set of issues related to IPv4 Internet access in the context of
public IPv4 address exhaustion are identified and described in
[I-D.levis-behave-ipv4-shortage-framework]. To what extent the
proposed solution handles those issues will be discussed in the next
version of this document.
Alternative address mapping proposals may be found at
[I-D.despres-sam].
2. Terminology
Within the context of this draft, the following terminology is used:
o Access segment: This segment encloses both IP access and backhaul
network. Within this document, this access segment encompass an
access PoP.
o Core network: Denotes a set of IP networking capabilities and
resources which are between the interconnection and the access
segments.
o Interconnection segment: Includes all nodes and resources which
are deployed at the border of a given AS (Autonomous System) a la
BGP (Border Gateway Protocol).
o PRR: Stands for Port Range Router. This function is responsible
to handle a port-based routing. This function may retrieve the
port value and use it to determine which routing action is to be
executed or use it together with the destination IP address to
build an IPv6 address.
o Interconnection PRR (i-PRR): A PRR which is deployed at
interconnection segment.
o Access PRR (a-PRR): A PRR which is deployed at access segment.
o SMAP: Stands for Stateless A+P Mapping. This function is
responsible to encapsulate (Resp. de-encapsulate), in a stateless
scheme, IPv4 packets in (Resp. from) IPv6 ones. A SMAP function
may be hosted in a PRR, end-user device, etc.
o Port-restricted device (PRD): A device which is able to constrain
its source port number to be within a given Port Range. A port
restricted device may be of several types such as:
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
* CPE (Customer Premise Equipment)/HGW (Home Gateway)
* PDA (Personal Digital Assistant)
* Mobile terminal
3. Reminder of the Port Range Solution
This section is a reminder of the solution presented in
[I-D.boucadair-port-range]. For more details about the solution, the
reader is invited to refer to [I-D.boucadair-port-range].
The main principle of the solution is to assign the same IP address
(called Primary IP Address) to several end-users' devices and to
constraint the source port numbers to be used by each device. In
addition to the assigned IP address to access IP connectivity
services, an additional parameter, called Port Range, is also
assigned to the customer's device. For outbound communications, a
given port restricted device proceeds to its classical operations
except the constraint to control the source port number assignment so
as to be within the Port Range. The traffic is then routed without
any modification inside the Service Provider's domain and delivered
to its final destination. For inbound communications, the traffic is
trapped by a dedicated function called: Port Range Router (PRR).
This function may be embedded in current routers or hosted by new
nodes to be integrated in the IP infrastructure of these service
providers. Appropriate routing tuning policies are enforced so as to
drive the inbound traffic to cross a PRR. Each PRR correlate the
Primary IP Address and information about the allowed port values with
a specific identifier called: routing identifier (e.g. Private IPv4
address, IPv6 address, point-to-point link identifier, etc). This
routing identifier is used to route the packets to the suitable
device among all those having the same IP address.
Port-restricted devices are provisioned with port range to be used,
especially the Port Mask to be applied when selecting a port value as
a source port. A Port Mask defines a set of ports that all have in
common a subset of pre-positioned bits. This set of ports is also
called Port Range. Two port numbers are said to belong to the same
Port Range if and only if, they have the same Port Mask. A Port Mask
is composed of a Port Range Value and a Port Range Mask.
o The Port Range Value indicates the value of the significant bits
of the Port Mask. The Port Range Value is coded as follows:
* The significant bits may take a value of 0 or 1.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
* All the other bits (non significant ones) are set to 0.
o The Port Range Mask indicates, by the bit(s) set to 1, the
position of the significant bits of the Port Range Value.
0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| Port Range Mask
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | |
| | | (3 significant bits)
v v v
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| Port Range Value
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 1 x x x x x x x x x x x x x| Usable ports (x may take a value of 0 or 1).
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Example of Port Range Mask and Port Range Value
An example of port range is provided in Figure 1. Ports belonging to
this port range must have the 1st bit (Resp. the 2nd and 3rd), from
the left, set to 0 (Resp. 0 and 1). The Port Mask is represented as:
001xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
4. IPv6-IPv4 Address Mapping Formalism
This section discusses issues related to the building of an IPv6
prefix or IPv6 address using IPv4-related information:
4.1. IPv6 Prefix: Another IPv4-mapped Prefix Scheme
[I-D.boucadair-port-range] proposes to assign the same public IPv4
address together with a port range to several devices. In order to
discriminate those devices, an additional identifier called, routing
identifier, is required. This identifier may be a secondary IPv4
address, PPP session identifier, etc. This document assumes that
this identifier is an IPv6 address. This prefix is built using IPv4-
related information as illustrated in Figure 2.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+------------------------+----------+---------+
| WKIPv6 | @IPv4 | PRM |
+------------------------+----------+---------+
Max.
<-----------n bits------> < 32 bits> <16 bits >
<-----------------64 bits max.---------------->
Figure 2: IPv6 prefix enclosing an IPv4 address and a port range
1. The length of this prefix is recommended to be less than 64 bits;
2. WKIPv6: is a sub-prefix belonging to the service provider or
well-known prefix allocated by IANA for this service. The length
of this field is variable (may be different from a service
provider to another if not allocated by IANA). The WKIPv6 prefix
used to build an IPv4-mapped IPv6 prefix may not be the same as
the one used to execute the IPv4-to-IPv6 mapping function
introduced in Section 4.2.
3. @IPv4 field encloses the shared IPv4 address. The length of this
field is 32 bits;
4. PRM field includes the value of the significant bits of the Port
Range. The maximum length of this field is 16 bits. But, in
deployment scenarios this field may be 3, 4 or 5 bits. If n bits
are used to build the PRM, the same IPv4 address may be shared
between 2^n port-restricted devices.
For illustration purposes two examples are provided below.
Let suppose that a service provider dedicates the 2a01:c0a8::/29 to
build an IPv4-inferred IPv6 prefix. In this example, we suppose that
8 port restricted devices share the same public address
193.51.145.206 owing to a port range mask with three significant bits
(i.e. the three first bit are used to build the port mask. The
remaining 13 bits may take a 0 or 1 value ), yielding 8192 (2^16/2^3)
possible ports per each port-restricted device. The corresponding
IPv6Pref prefixes for these 8 port-restricted devices are thus the
following ones:
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
- 1st port-restricted device (Port Mask: 000xxxxxxxxxxxxx):
IPv6Pref = 2a01:c0a 1 11000001001100111001000111001110 000 ::
--------193.51.145.206---------- PRM
IPv6Pref = 2a01:c0aE:099C:8E70::/64
- 2nd port-restricted device (Port Mask: 001xxxxxxxxxxxxx):
IPv6Pref = 2a01:c0a 1 11000001001100111001000111001110 001 ::
--------193.51.145.206---------- PRM
IPv6Pref = 2a01:c0aE:099C:8E71::/64
- ...
- 8th port-restricted device (Port Mask: 111xxxxxxxxxxxxx):
IPv6Pref = 2a01:c0a 1 11000001001100111001000111001110 111 ::
--------193.51.145.206---------- PRM
IPv6Pref = 2a01:c0aE:099C:8E77::/64
In this second example, let suppose that the service provider
dedicates the 2a01:c::/20 prefix to build an IPv4-mapped IPv6 prefix.
If we consider that 193.51.145.206 address is shared between 16 (2^4,
4 bits are used as the significant bits of the port range) port-
restricted devices. The 16 port-restricted devices sharing that
address have the following IPv6Pref prefixes (only the first prefix
is represented below):
- 1st port-restricted device (Port Mask: 0000xxxxxxxxxxxx):
IPv6Pref = 2a01:c 11000001001100111001000111001110 0000 ::
--------193.51.145.206---------- PRM-
IPv6Pref = 2a01:cc13:391c:e0::/56
- ...
4.2. IPv4 to IPv6 Address Mapping Function
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
4.2.1. Overview
Within this memo, IPv4-to-IPv6 address mapping function denotes a
function which uses IPv4-related information, as conveyed in a
received IPv4 packet, to generate IPv6 one. This function generates
an IPv6 address which builds as illustrated in Figure 3.
o WKIPv6 is configured by the service provider.
o Then, the next 32 bits are set to the value of the destination
IPv4 address;
o The next 16 bits are set to the value of the destination port
number;
o The remaining bits are then set to zeros.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------...+
| WKIPv6 |Dest. IPv4 |Dest. | 0:0:0:0 |
| |address |port | |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------...+
Figure 3: WKIPv6A Address Format
4.2.2. Example
Let suppose that a given device is provided with the WKIPv6 prefix
equal to 2a01:c0a8::/29. Then the corresponding IPv6 address, using
the IPv4-to-IPv6 address mapping function, to the IPv4 address equal
to 193.51.145.206 and the port number equal to 19039
(0100101001011111) is the following:
IPv6PrefA=2a01:c0a 1 11000001001100111001000111001110 0100101001011111 ::
--------193.51.145.206--------- -----port-------
IPv6PrefA=2a01:c0aE:099C:8E72:52F8::/128
This IPv6 address falls in the IPv6 prefix of the second port-
restricted device (port range 001) as listed in the previous section.
4.3. IPv6 to IPv4 Address Mapping Function
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
4.3.1. Overview
Unlike the previous function, the IPv6-to-IPv4 address mapping
functions generates an IPv4 address together with a port number from
the header and the transport part of a received IPv6 packet as
follows:
o The destination IPv4 address corresponds to the 32 bits which
follow a per-configured Provider prefix;
o Destination port number is equal to the one of the received IPv6
packet.
4.3.2. Example
Let suppose that the WKIPv6 prefix equal to 2a01:c0a8::/29 is used.
Then the corresponding IPv4 address, resulting from the IPv6-to-IPv4
address mapping function applied to the address 2a01:c0aE:099C:8E71:
A5F8::/128 is 193.51.145.206 since:
2a01:c0aE:099C:8E71:A5F8 =
2a01:c0a 1 11000001001100111001000111001110 0100101001011111 ::
--------193.51.145.206--------- -----port-------
5. Stateless A+P Mapping Function
5.1. Stateless A+P Mapping gateway (SMAP) Function description
Stateless A+P Mapping gateway (SMAP) consists in two basic functions
as described in Figure 4.
1. SMAP encapsulates an IPv4 packet, destined to a shared IPv4
address, in IPv6 one. The IPv6 source address is constructed
(see Section 4.2) from the IPv4 source address and port number
plus the IPv6 prefix which has been provisioned to the node
performing the SMAP function. The destination IPv6 address is
constructed using the shared IPv4 destination address and port
number plus the IPv6 prefix which has been provisioned to the
SMAP function and which is dedicated to IPv4 destination
addresses.
2. SMAP extracts IPv4 incoming packets from IPv6 incoming ones which
have IPv6 source addresses belonging to the prefix of the node
performing the SMAP function. Extracted IPv4 packets are then
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
forwarded to the point identified by the IPv4 destination address
and port number.
+-------------------+
| |----IPv6---\
----IPv4---\| |----IPv4---\\
-----------/| |-----------//
| |-----------/
| SMAP |
| | /--IPv6-----
/---IPv4----| |//---IPv4----
\-----------| |\\-----------
| | \-----------
+-------------------+
Figure 4: Stateless A+P Mapping Gateway Function
A SMAP-enabled node will perform the stateless 6/4 mapping function
for all public shared IPv4 addresses for which it was designated as a
stateless 6/4 mapping gateway.
To perform stateless 6/4 mapping function a SMAP gateway must:
o be provided with an IPv6 prefix (i.e. WKIPv6). The SMAP gateway
uses this prefix to construct IPv6 source addresses for all IPv4
shared addresses for which it was designated as a SMAP gateway.
The IPv6 prefix may be provisioned statically or dynamically (e.g.
DHCP)
o be able to know the IPv6 prefix of the node serving as another
SMAP gateway for IPv4 destination addresses. This prefix may be
known in various ways:
* Default or Well known prefix which was provisioned statically
or dynamically;
* Retained at the reception of incoming IPv4-in-IPv6 encapsulated
packets;
* Discovered at the communication starting thanks to mechanisms
as DNS resolution for example.
When the SMAP-enabled node receives IPv4 packets with IPv4 source
addresses for which it was not designated as a SMAP gateway, it will
not perform stateless 6/4 mapping function for those packets. Those
packets will be handled in a classical way (i.e. forwarded, dropped
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
or locally processed).
When the SMAP-enabled node receives IPv6 packets with IPv6 addresses
which do not match with its IPv6 prefix, it will not perform the
stateless 6/4 mapping function for those packets. Those packets will
be handled in a classical way (i.e. forwarded, dropped or locally
processed).
5.2. Implementation modes
Stateless mapping function may be achieved in two main modes. Those
modes consist in mapping the traffic only in one direction or in the
two directions as described below.
5.2.1. SMAP to route incoming traffic destined to a shared IPv4 address
IPv4 traffic with shared IPv4 source addresses are forwarded by the
node A without performing stateless mapping function. This traffic
will reach its destination thanks to a classical routing. In the
opposite direction, the traffic sent by the destination has to pass
by the node B which performs the stateless mapping function
(encapsulating in IPv6 packets) before forwarding to the node A. The
node A performs the stateless mapping function (extract IP v4
packets) before forwarding IPv4 packets to the points identified by
the IPv4 destination addresses and port number. In this case, both
IPv4 and IPv6 traffic are routed in the network between the nodes A
and B.
+----------+
--IPv4---|----------|------------IPv4--------------------\
---------|----------|------------------------------------/
| |
| +------+ | +------+
| | | | /----IPv6-----| |
/--IPv4--| | SMAP | |//---IPv4---- | SMAP |/---IPv4----
\--------| | | |\\----------- | |\-----------
| | | | \-------------| |
| +------+ | +------+
| |
+----------+
node A node B
Figure 5: First Configuration
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
5.2.2. No IPv4 capabilities are used anymore between two SMAP-enabled
nodes
In this configuration, the node A performs the stateless mapping
function on the received IPv4 traffic (encapsulated in IPv6 packets)
before forwarding to the node B. The node B performs the stateless
mapping function on the received IPv6 traffics (extracting IPv4
packets) before forwarding the IPv4 traffic to the destination
identified by the IPv4 destination address and port number. In the
opposite direction and as previously, the node B performs the
stateless mapping function on the received IPv4 traffics
(encapsulating in IPv6 packets) before forwarding to the node A. The
node A performs the stateless mapping function on the received IPv6
traffic (extracting IPv4 packets) before forwarding the IPv4 traffic
to the point identified by the IPv4 destination address and port
number. In this case, only IPv6 traffic is managed in the network
segment between the nodes A and B.
+------+ +------+
| |----IPv6---\ | |
----IPv4---\| |----IPv4---\\| |----IPv4---\
-----------/| |-----------//| |-----------/
| |-----------/ | |
| SMAP | | SMAP |
| | /----IPv6---| |
/---IPv4----| |//---IPv4----| |/---IPv4----
\-----------| |\\-----------| |\-----------
| | \-----------| |
+------+ +------+
node A node B
Figure 6: Second Configuration
5.3. Deployment Scenarios
Several deployment scenarios of the SMAP function may be envisaged in
the context of Port Range based solutions:
o A SMAP function is embedded in a port-restricted device. Other
SMAP-enabled nodes are deployed in the boundaries between IPv6-
enabled realms and IPv4 ones. This scenario may be particularly
deployed for intra-domain communications so as to interconnect
heterogeneous realms (i.e. IPv6/IPv4) within the same AS.
o A SMAP function is embedded in a port-restricted device. Other
SMAP-enabled nodes are deployed in the interconnection segment
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
(with adjacent IPv4-only ones) of a given AS. This deployment
scenario is more suitable for service providers targeting the
deployment of IPv6 since it eases the migration to full IPv6.
Core nodes are not required to activate anymore both IPv4 and IPv6
transfer capabilities.
Other considerations regarding the interconnection of SMAP-enabled
domains should be elaborated. The following provides a non
exhaustive list of interconnection schemes.
o The interconnection of two domains implementing the SMAP function
may be deployed via IPv4 Internet (Figure 7): This means that IPv4
packets encapsulated in IPv6 one are transferred using IPv6 until
reaching the first SMAP-node. Then these packets are de-
encapsulated and are forwarded using IPv4 transfer capabilities.
A remote SMAP-enabled node will receive those packets and proceeds
to an IPv4-in-IPv6 encapsulation. These packets are then routed
normally until reaching the port-restricted devices which de-
encapsulates the packets.
+------+ +------+ +--------+ +------+ +------+
| |--IPv6---\ | | | | | |---IPv6--\ | |
| |--IPv4---\\| |---|-IPv4---|--\| |---IPv4--\\| |
| |---------//| |---|--------|--/| |---------//| |
| |---------/ | | |Internet| | |---------/ | |
| SMAP | | SMAP | | IPv4 | | SMAP | | SMAP |
| | /---IPv6--| | | | | | /---IPv6--| |
| |//---IPv4--| |/--|-IPv4---|---| |//--IPv4---| |
| |\\---------| |\--|--------|---| |\\---------| |
| | \---------| | | | | | \---------| |
+------+ +------+ +--------+ +------+ +------+
Source node A node B Destination
Figure 7: Interconnection Scenario 1
o A second scheme is to interconnect two realms implementing the
SMAP function using IPv6 (Figure 8). Two sub-scenarios are
identified:
* An IPv6 prefix (i.e. WKIPv6) assigned by IANA is used for this
service. If appropriate routing configuration have been
enforced, then the IPv6 encapsulated packets will be routed
until the final destination.
* If an IPv6 belonging a service provider prefix is used. This
will be covered in the next versions of the document.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+------+ +------------+ +------+
| | | | | |
| |----IPv6-----|----IPv6----|----IPv6----\ | |
| |----IPv4-----|------------|----IPv4----\\| |
| |-------------|------------|------------//| |
| |-------------|------------|------------/ | |
| SMAP | | Internet v6| | SMAP |
| | /-----IPv6--|------------|-----IPv6-----| |
| |//---IPv4----|------------|-------IPv4---| |
| |\\-----------|------------|--------------| |
| | \-----------|------------|--------------| |
| | | | | |
+------+ +------------+ +------+
Source Destination
Figure 8: Interconnection Scenario 2
5.4. SMAP and PRR
Within this draft, a PRR-enabled node implements both SMAP function
and required functions to handle fragmentation and other portless
protocols. More details about fragmentation may be found at
[I-D.boucadair-port-range].
In the remaining part, the text refers only to PRR and not SMAP.
6. IPv6 Migration Scenarios
6.1. Overview
This section proposes a set of migration steps in the context of IPv4
address exhaustion and IPv6 deployment. Both objectives are taken
into account.
The proposed steps are informational. An analysis of these steps and
proposed IPv6 migration paths are discussed in Section 6.7.
The following figure (i.e. (Figure 9)) provides an overview of
network segments and the localisation of PRR-enabled nodes. One or
several PRR may be enabled. PRD1 and PRD2 are two port-restricted
devices which have been provisioned with the same IP1 public address
and two distinct port ranges (PR1 and PR2).
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+---------+ +---------------------+ +----------+ +---------+
+----+ | | | | | +-----+ | |IPv4 |
|PRD1|----| |--| |--| |i-PRR| |--|Internet |
+----+ | +-----+ | | | | | | | +---------+
IP1, PR1 | |a-PRR| | | core network | | +-----+ |
| +-----+ | | | | |
+----+ | | | | | | +---------+
|PRD2|----| | | | | |--|IPv6 |
+----+ | | | | | | |Internet |
IP1, PR2 +---------+ +---------------------+ +----------+ +---------+
access/ interconnection
backhaul segment
Figure 9: Reference Architecture
6.2. IPv6 Prefixes and Addresses
Different types of IPv6 prefixes and addresses are used in the scope
of the solutions described in the document (i.e. Step_0
(Section 6.4), Step_1 (Section 6.5) and Step_2 (Section 6.6)).
Theses prefixes and addresses are listed hereafter:
1. IPv6Pref: A prefix allocated to the port-restricted device. A
packet sent to addresses belonging to this prefix are routed
toward this port-restricted device. IPv6Pref prefix addresses
may also be used to send and receive native IPv6 traffic. In
stateless IPv6-IPv4 Address Mapping mode (as explained above),
the IPv6Pref structure is related to the IPv4 address plus port
range. In binding mode, IPv6Pref and IPv4 address plus port
range are independent.
2. IPv6PrefA: An address belonging to IPv6Pref prefix used to send
IPv4-in-IPv6 traffic.
3. WKIPv6: An IPv6 prefix (e.g. /21, /32) common to all of the IPv6
packets which must be routed to a PRR function. It is for
further study to decide whether this prefix is to be:
A. Service provider scope
B. or common to all service providers (to be defined by IANA).
Both alternatives are compatible with the proposed solutions.
4. WKIPv6A: An address belonging to the WKIPv6 prefix. A WKIPv6A
address includes the WKIPv6 prefix on its left most part followed
by the destination IPv4 address and destination port number, as
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
shown in Figure 3. When a binding table is implemented, a given
a-PRR has to transform a destination address WKIPv6A to a
destination address IPv6PrefA, it proceeds as illustrated in
Figure 10.
+-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| | | | |
| WKIPv6 |public IPv4 |Dest. | 0:0:0:0 |
| |address |port | |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| || |
||
vv
+--------------------------------------------------+
| binding table |
| |
|(...) |
| [public IPv4 address, Port Range] => IPv6PrefA |
|(...) || |
+---------------------------------------------||---+
||
/====================/
||
\/
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| IPv6PrefA |
| |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 10: Fetching IPv6PrefA from WKIPv6A
The following sections describe three migration steps and a set of
proposed migration paths. The proposed solutions are stateless at
interconnection segment. A binding table may be implemented to meet
requirements of service providers which do not want to closely
correlate their IPv6 address plan and the IPv4 one. More details are
provided below.
6.3. On Stateless and Binding Table Modes
6.3.1. Stateless Mode
Complete stateless mapping implies that the IPv4 address and the
significant bits coding the port range are reflected inside the IPv6
prefix assigned to the port-restricted device. Two alternatives are
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
offered when such a stateless mapping is to be enabled:
- either using the IPv6 prefix already used for native IPv6
traffic,
- or provide two prefixes to the port-restricted device: one for
the native IPv6 traffic and one for the IPv4 traffic.
Note that:
- Providing two IPv6 prefixes has the advantages of allowing a /64
prefix for the port-restricted device along with another prefix
(e.g. a /56 or /64) for native IPv6 traffic. This alternative
spares the service provider to relate the native IPv6 traffic
addressing plan to the IPv4 addressing plan. The drawback is the
burden to allocate two prefixes to each port-restricted device and
to route them. In addition, an address selection issue may be
encountered.
- Providing one prefix for both needs (e.g. a /56 or a /64) spares
the service provider to handle two types of IPv6 prefix for the
port-restricted device and in routing tables. But the drawback is
that it somewhat links strongly the IPv4 addressing plan to the
allocated IPv6 prefixes.
6.3.2. Binding Table Mode
Another alternative is to assign a "normal" IPv6 prefix to the port-
restricted device and to use a binding table, which can be hosted by
a service node, to correlate the (shared IPv4 address, Port Range)
with an IPv6 address part of the assigned IPv6 prefix. For
scalability reasons, this table should be instantiated within PRR-
enabled nodes which are close to the port-restricted devices. The
number of required entries if hosted at interconnection segment would
be equal to the amount of subscribed users (one per port-restricted
device).
The stateless mode is recommended.
6.4. Step_0: IPv6 at Access Network
This step is described in [I-D.boucadair-port-range]. This step
assumes that IPv6 is used to convey incoming traffic to its final
destination. For this reason, an IPv6 address is used as the routing
identifier. More information about this step is provided below.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
6.4.1. Context
This step can be deployed at earlier stages of IPv6 deployment. The
impact on routing (especially path optimisation) and also offered
services is the same as for the Port Range solution described in
[I-D.boucadair-port-range]. The service brokenness risk is
optimized. IPv6 is used in this step as a means to convey incoming
IPv4 traffic. Within this step, IPv6 is used in the access segment
to deliver the received IPv4 traffic.
When this step is deployed, at least 50% of the handled traffic
(incoming+outgoing), at the IP access segment, of a service
provider's domain is achieved using IPv6 capabilities. IPv4
capabilities are used only for outgoing traffic.
Native IPv6 connectivity may also be offered to end-users.
6.4.2. Overall Procedure
This section discusses additional points related to IPv6 usage in the
context of the Port Range solution described in
[I-D.boucadair-port-range].
6.4.2.1. Provisioning Operations
This section lists the set of information required for a port-
restricted device to access the connectivity service.
6.4.2.1.1. IP Connectivity Information
Each port-restricted device is assigned with:
1. A shared public IPv4 address. In addition to this address, a
port range is also assigned to the device.
2. An IPv6 prefix: denominated in the rest as IPv6Pref. This prefix
is allocated to the port-restricted device and it is used to
discriminate (a given device) among all those having the same
public IPv4 address. This address may be used also to send and
receive native IPv6 traffic or a second prefix may be assigned
specific for native IPv6 traffic.
6.4.2.1.2. Provisioning procedure
To convey IPv4 configuration information, one of these solutions may
be implemented:
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
1. Activate DHCP and support port range options as described in
[I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign];
2. Use PPP and support the IPCP Port Range Configuration Options as
specified in [I-D.boucadair-pppext-portrange-option].
To convey IPv6 configuration information, DHCPv6 [RFC3315] may be
activated. When several IPv4-inferred IPv6 address structures are
supported, options defined in
[I-D.boucadair-dhcpv6-shared-address-option] can be used.
6.4.2.2. Port Restricted Device's behaviour and supported functions
A port-restricted device may be a host, a CPE, etc.
6.4.2.2.1. Port Restriction Behaviour
The behaviour of the port-restricted device is as follows:
1. If the port-restricted device hosts a NAT function: For incoming
traffic, the port-restricted device checks if the destination
port number is within the Port Range, otherwise the packet is
dropped. When the destination port number of a received packet
(from outside the LAN) falls inside the Port Range, classical NAT
operations are enforced and the packet is then routed to its
final destination in the LAN.
2. Otherwise, the port-restricted device is an end-user host: the
device restricts its source port numbers to be with the assigned
Port Range. Received IPv4 packets with a destination port number
outside the Port Range must be dropped.
6.4.2.2.2. Handling Outgoing traffic
The same procedure as described in [I-D.boucadair-port-range]
applies. In addition to the normal NAT operations, the port-
restricted device ensures that the source port number is within the
allowed Port Range.
6.4.2.2.3. Handling Incoming traffic
For incoming traffic, two cases may be considered:
1. IPv6 encapsulated traffic: for encapsulated IPv6 packets, the
port-restricted device de-encapsulates the packets and extracts
the embedded IPv4 one. The original IPv4 packets is then treated
and handled locally. If the destination port of that packet is
within the Port Range of that port-restricted device, and
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
depending on the local NAT implementation if any, the packet may
be accepted and then proceed to classical NAT operation.
Otherwise, the packet is dropped.
2. IPv6 native traffic: No constraint is required. The traffic
should be routed to it final destination, if the port-restricted
device is a CPE.
6.4.2.3. PRR Behaviour
6.4.2.3.1. Supported functions
In addition to the functions listed in [I-D.boucadair-port-range],
the PRR must support an IPv6 encapsulation function.
6.4.2.3.2. Localization
The PRR function is deployed under the same conditions as the ones
discussed in [I-D.boucadair-port-range].
6.4.2.3.3. Behaviour
The PRR intervenes only for incoming traffic destined to a shared
IPv4 address.
a. If a binding table is implemented: This binding table stores the
required information to route the traffic destined to a shared IP
address to the appropriate port-restricted device among all those
sharing the same IP address. An IPv6 prefix may be used as
routing identifier. In this case, the structure of the binding
table is: (shared IPv4 address, Port Range) ==> IPv6 prefix.
Instead of the IPv6 prefix itself (IPv6Pref), the binding table
may contain a specific address under IPv6Pref (called in the rest
IPv6PrefA). When a binding table is adopted, the IPv6 prefix
assigned to a port-restricted device is not constrained. There
is no need for the service provider to allocate two different
IPv6 prefixes to the port-restricted devices (one for native IPv6
traffic and another one for the IPv4 encapsulated traffic). Only
one may suffice for the two needs.
b. Stateless mapping: The service provider assigns an IPv4 shared
address, a port range and an IPv6 prefix with IPv6 prefix
containing explicitly the IPv4 address and the significant bits
of the port range (i.e. Bits used to built the Port Range Mask,
see [I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign]). When a stateless mapping is
adopted, it is possible that the service provider has to cope
with constraints when allocating the IPv6 prefix and the shared
IPv4 address to the port-restricted devices. As a matter of fact
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
the IPv6 prefix must reflect the shared IPv4 address.
Alternatively the service provider may instead allocate two
different prefixes for the two needs (IPv6 native traffic and
IPv4 encapsulated traffic).
In the remaining part of this section, "PRR retrieves the
corresponding IPv6 prefix address" means that:
a. If a binding table is implemented: the PRR looks-up through this
table and retrieves the IPv6Pref or IPv6PrefA corresponding to
(IPv4 address, Port Range). If IPv6Pref is retrieved, the PRR
builds an IPv6Pref address in complementing the IPv6Pref with a
fixed bit sequence chosen by the service provider to be always
the same complementary bit sequence for all port-restricted
devices. .
b. Stateless mode: an IPv6 prefix address (i.e. IPv6PrefA) is built
using the IPv4 address and the destination port number.
In both cases, when the PRR has got/built the corresponding IPv6PrefA
, the PRR encapsulates the original packets in an IPv6 one with a
destination IP address equal to the IPv6Pref address. The source
IPv6 address is an address of the PRR. It may be an anycast IPv6
address or unicast one.
This packet is then routed according to instantiated IGP routes.
6.4.2.4. Routing considerations
The same IGP considerations as detailed in [I-D.boucadair-port-range]
should be taken into account. In addition to these considerations,
IPv6 routes should be installed to reach port-restricted devices from
an IPv6-enabled PRR.
6.4.3. Focus on Communication Establishment
6.4.3.1. Outgoing IPv4 Communications
Outgoing IPv4 traffic is handled as described in
[I-D.boucadair-port-range]. The traffic issued from a port-
restricted device is routed to its final destination. The traffic is
not altered and is transferred to its final destination.
6.4.3.2. Incoming IPv4 Communications
Owing to IGP configuration, the traffic destined to a shared IP
address must cross a PRR. This latter encapsulates the received IPv4
packets in IPv6 ones as described in Section 6.4.2.3.3. The traffic
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
is then routed using the IPv6PrefA as a destination address. The
traffic is received by the device among those sharing the same IPv4
address (because this port-restricted device is allocated with this
IPv6Pref). A de-encapsulation operation is then executed as
described in Section 6.4.2.2. If the de-encapsulated IPv4 traffic is
destined to a port within the assigned Port Range, the traffic is
accepted, otherwise it is dropped.
6.4.3.3. Outgoing IPv6 Communications
Since the port-restricted device is IPv6-enabled, native IPv6
communications may be offered. This assumes that the service
provider has deployed means for IPv6 transfer capability. The same
prefix used to convey incoming IPv4 traffic (IPv6Pref) may be used
also to send and receive native IPv6 traffic. Alternatively, a
second IPv6 prefix may be assigned to that purpose.
6.4.3.4. Incoming IPv6 Communications
Native IPv6 communications are supported.
6.4.4. Typical Flow Example
In order to illustrate this step, let consider the example shown in
the following figure (Figure 11). M1 is a machine behind a port-
restricted device (called CPE as Customer Port restricted Equipment
in the example and Figure 11).
M1 wants to establish an IPv4 communication with RM (Remote Machine).
To do so, an IPv4 packet is issued by M1. This packet has as source
IP address equal to Pri_IPv4. The packet is then received by CPE.
This latter enforces its NAT operations. As a result, an IPv4 packet
with a source IP address equal to Pub_IPv4 and a source port number
within the Port Range of CPE is sent. The resulting packet is
forwarded according to IPv4 transfer capabilities until reaching its
final destination RM.
As a response, RM sends an IPv4 packet destined to Pub_IPv4 and a
destination port number equal to the source port number of the
received packet. This message is received by PRR. The PRR
encapsulates the received IPv4 packet in an IPv6 one. The resulting
IPv6 packet is then forwarded. The encapsulated packet is received
by the appropriate CPE among those having the same IPv4 address. A
de-encapsulation is enforced. The original IPv4 packet is extracted.
Once classical NAT operations are executed, the CPE forwards the IPv4
packet to M1.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+--+ +---+ +--+
|M1| |CPE| |RM|
+--+ +---+ +--+
| | |
|==Pri_IPv4_Out==>|===============Pub_IPv4_Out===============>|
| | |
| | +---+ |
| | |PRR| |
| | +---+ |
| | | |
|<==Pri_IPv4_In===|<==IPv6_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)==|<==Pub_IPv4_In==|
| | | |
Figure 11: Flow Example (Step 0): Inter-domain
6.5. Step_1: IPv6 a Means to Transfer Incoming IPv4 Packets
6.5.1. Context
Step_1 is characterized by the activation of two levels of PRR
functions in several segments of a given service provider's network.
Some PRR-enabled nodes are deployed close to the port-restricted
devices (e.g. In the access or backhaul network) whilst others are
installed at the interconnection segment of the ISP network as shown
in Figure 9.
The objective of this step is to maximize the invocation of IPv6
capabilities, particularly to convey incoming IPv4 traffic until
delivery to final destination (e.g. port-restricted device).
6.5.2. Overall Procedure
Step_1 works exactly the same way as that the Step_0, apart what is
specified in this section. In particular, there are none difference
between Step_0 and Step_1 at the level of the port-restricted device.
6.5.2.1. Routing considerations
- a-PRR: As in Step_0, a-PRR announces the shared IPv4 prefixes it
serves. In addition, in case of binding table mode, it announces
in IGP the aggregates of all the WKIPv6A addresses of the port-
restricted devices it serves so that IPv4-in-IPv6 packets reach
this a-PRR.
- i-PRR: i-PRR announces in EGP (if embedded in an ASBR node) or
in IGP (if deployed behind an ASBR), all (aggregated) IPv4
prefixes of all port-restricted devices it can route packets to
(via a-PRR in case of binding table). Depending of the structure
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
of the service provider network, some i-PRR-enabled nodes may be
positioned inside the service provider network to encapsulate more
IPv4 traffic into IPv6. For example, from a region A to another
region B of the service provider's network.
6.5.2.2. Behaviour of a-PPR and i-PRR
Figure 12 show the respective role of a-PRR and i-PRR-enabled nodes.
The labels of the arrows are explained in further sub-sections.
- CPE1 (Customer Port restricted Equipment) is a port-restricted
device 'served' by a-PRR (means that a-PRR announces in IGP the
assigned shared IPv4 address to CPE1).
- CPE2 is a device of another customer connected to the network
managed by the same service provider. It may be either another
port-restricted device or a device with a plain IPv4 address.
- RM is a remote machine located outside the AS managed by the
service provider.
+----+ +-----+ +-----+
|CPE1| |i-PRR| | RM |
+----+ +-----+ +-----+
| | |
|<=====IPv6PrefA_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)=======|<===Pub_IPv4_In===|
| | |
| | |
| +-----+
| |a-PRR|
| +-----+ +----+
| | |CPE2|
| | +----+
| | |
|<==IPv6PrefA_Enc |<==Pub_IPv4_In==|
| (Pub_IPv4_In)==| |
| | |
Figure 12: Step_1: Stateless mode
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
|CPE1| |a-PRR| |i-PRR| | RM |
+----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
| | | |
|<==IPv6PrefA_Enc |<==WKIPv6A_Enc |<===Pub_IPv4_In===|
| (Pub_IPv4_In)==| (Pub_IPv4_In)=| |
| | | |
| |
| |
| | +----+
| | |CPE2|
| | +----+
| | |
|<==IPv6PrefA_Enc |<==Pub_IPv4_In==|
| (Pub_IPv4_In)==| |
| | |
Figure 13: Step_1: Binding table mode
6.5.2.2.1. Localization
The PRR function is deployed under the same conditions as in Step_0
but as previously mentioned more PRR-enabled nodes are deployed
within the ISP network.
6.5.2.2.2. Stateless Mapping Mode
In case the service provider assigns an IPv4 shared address, a port
range and an IPv6 prefix containing explicitly the IPv4 address and
the significant bits of the port range, i-PRR-nodes are able to build
the IPv6Pref address of the port-restricted device using the IPv4
destination address and destination port bits of received IPv4
packets.
Hence, i-PPR behaviour is the same one as the PRR one described in
Step_0, when stateless mapping is enforced. In that case, the IPv4-
in-IPv6 packet does not pass through the a-PRR but it is routed
directly to the port-restricted device (e.g. To CPE1 as depicted in
Figure 12).
6.5.2.2.3. Binding Table Mode
This behaviour is illustrated in Figure 13.
If a binding table is implemented within a-PRR, i-PRR-enabled nodes
can not hold all the binding table entries corresponding to all the
port-restricted devices it may route traffic for. Consequently, it
has to route the IPv4 traffic towards the a-PRR of which the port-
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
restricted device depends. More precisely, a given i-PRR
encapsulates the incoming IPv4 traffic in IPv6 packets using the
following addresses:
- The source IPv6 address is one of the global IPv6 addresses of
the i-PRR.
- The destination IPv6 is built by i-PRR using an address under
the WKIPv6 prefix conforming to the formalism defined in
Section 4.2. This address, called WKIPv6A, includes the WKIPv6
prefix on its left most part and the destination IPv4 address and
destination port number in this right most part.
Thus, an i-PRR-enabled node routes normally this IPv4-in-IPv6 packet
(labeled WKIPv6A_Enc (Pub_IPv4_In) in Figure 13) using IPv6 transfer
capabilities. The packet is routed towards the a-PRR serving the
recipient port-restricted device (CPE1 is Figure 13) since
appropriate routing configuration has been enforced (see
Section 6.5.2.1).
Upon receipt of that packet, the a-PRR proceeds as follows:
- It retrieves the IPv4 shared address and port bits parts of the
WKIPv6A address. Then, with these parts it looks-up through its
binding table to fetch the IPv6PrefA corresponding to the couple
(IPv4 address, Port Range).
- Once retrieved, the a-PRR positions the IPv6PrefA address as the
destination address in place of the WKIPv6A address and forwards
the packet. The IPv4-in-IPv6 packet is routed until reaching the
port-restricted device (CPE1 in Figure 13).
As shown in Figure 13 (bottom part), when another machine (CPE2)
within the same service provider's domain sends traffic to the port-
restricted device CPE1, the working of a-PRR is the same one as that
of the PRR is Step_0.
6.6. Step_2: Only IPv6 Is Used For Both Incoming and Outgoing Traffic
6.6.1. Context
This step is suitable for service providers wishing to migrate to
full IPv6 and to offer a global connectivity using IPv6. This step
provides a lightweight procedure to interconnect IPv6 with IPv4
realms. This procedure may be fully stateless or require a binding
table. This table does not include session-based information.
Only IPv6 connectivity is used inside the service provider's domain;
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
IPv4 capabilities are deactivated. No parallel IPv4 and IPv6
operational tasks will be maintained anymore in the core segment.
Two implementation modes may be envisaged:
1. Encapsulation-based mode: This mode suggests using both inbound
and outbound IPv6 encapsulation to carry IPv4 traffic (received
from the remaining IPv4-only realms). This mode is almost
similar to Step_1 for handling incoming IPv4 packets. Unlike
Step_1, the required operations to build the outgoing
encapsulated packets is also supported in this step.
2. Translation-based mode: Unlike the first mode, this one assumes
that there is no need to maintain both IPv4 and IPv6 stacks in
the CPE. It is recommended to implement this mode when mature
IPv6 deployment has been observed and that IPv6 realms become
more important than IPv4-only ones.
More information about these two modes is provided in the sub-
sections hereafter.
6.6.2. The IPv6 Encapsulation-Based Mode
6.6.2.1. Provisioning Operations
6.6.2.1.1. IP Connectivity Information
In addition to the information required for Step_1, a WKIPv6 IPv6
prefix may e configured on the port-restricted device. This prefix
is to be used when running the IPv4-to-IPv6 mapping function required
to encapsulate IPv4 traffic in IPv6 one.
6.6.2.1.2. Provisioning Procedure
Idem as Step_1.
6.6.2.2. Routing Considerations
IPv4 IGP protocols are not anymore enabled in the core network. Only
IPv6 routing table is maintained by involved routers.
Inter-domain IPv4 connectivity is maintained with IPv4-only realms.
IPv4 network prefixes are mapped to IPv6 prefixes (using a WKIPv6
configured by the service provider) which are injected in the
deployed IPv6 IGP protocol.
A given a-PRR MUST advertise in IGP the aggregated IPv6 prefixes it
handles. Doing so, all intra-domain IPv6 packets will cross that
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
PRR.
6.6.2.3. Port Restricted Device's Behaviour and Supported Functions
6.6.2.3.1. Port Range Restriction
Idem as Step_1.
6.6.2.3.2. Handling Outgoing Traffic
Unlike Step_1, outgoing IPv4 traffic is encapsulated in IPv4-in-IPv6
packets. Concretely, the port-restricted device executes its port
restricted NAT operations (if any). The resulting IPv4 packet is
then encapsulated in an IPv6 packet. The port-restricted device
selects an IPv6 address from its assigned IPv6 prefix (IPv6Pref).
This address IPv6PrefA is used as the source IPv6 address of the
encapsulated packet.
Two options may be considered to build the destination IPv6 address
of the encapsulated packet as listed below:
1. The port-restricted device is provisioned to use an anycast IPv6
address. This anycast IPv6 address is configured on internal
interfaces of all PRRs. This mode is may be implemented when the
port-restricted device is not able to build a destination IPv6
address reflecting the IPv4 address and port of its correspondent
(i.e. the port-restricted device does not support the mapping
function defined in Section 4.2).
2. The port-restricted device is able to build an IPv6 address using
a WKIPv6 prefix (which may be distinct than the one used to build
mapped IPv6 prefixes by i-PRRs), the destination IPv4 address and
the destination port number.
No constraints are to be followed for outgoing native IPv6 traffic.
6.6.2.3.3. Handling Incoming Traffic
Idem as Step_1.
6.6.2.4. PRR Behaviour
6.6.2.4.1. Supported Functions
In addition to the functions supported in Step_1, an IPv4-in-IPv6 de-
encapsulation function must be supported by a-PRR.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
6.6.2.4.2. Localization
Idem as Step_1.
6.6.2.4.3. Behaviour: Stateless Mode
The behaviour of both access and interconnection PRRs is elaborated
below:
1. If an anycast IPv6 address is configured on interfaces of all
a-PRRs:
* An (access) PRR will receive the encapsulated packet issued
from port-restricted devices. The packet is de-encapsulated
and the original IPv4 one is retrieved. Then, the (access)
PRR builds a destination IPv6 address using a WKIPv6 prefix,
the destination IPv4 address and the destination port number.
The original IPv4 packet is then encapsulated in IPv6 packet
with a source IPv6 address of the (access) PRR and the
destination IPv6 address equal to the newly built one. The
packet is forwarded to next hop according to IPv6 routing
table. If the correspondent is not a port-restricted device,
the packet is intercepted by a-PRR or a i-PRR depending of
where the correspondent is located. This a-PRR or i-PRR
proceeds to the de-encapsulation operation. The extracted
IPv4 packet is then forwarded to the IPv4 correspondent. This
encapsulated packet is received by an (access/
interconnection) PRR which proceeds to a de-encapsulation
operation. The extracted IPv4 packet is then forwarded to the
next IPv4 hop.
* Incoming IPv4 traffic is intercepted by an (interconnection)
PRR. The PRR encapsulates the received IPv4 packet in an IPv6
one using the following information:
+ The source IPv6 address is one of the global IPv6 addresses
of the PRR.
+ The destination IPv6 is built by the PRR using the
formalism defined in Section 4.2. This address is build
using a WKIPv6 prefix, the destination IPv4 address and the
destination port number. The appropriate port-restricted
device, among those having the same IPv4 address, will
receive the packet. This is illustrated in Figure 14.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+---+ +-----+ +-----+ +--+
|CPE| |a-PRR| |i-PRR| |RM|
+---+ +-----+ +-----+ +--+
| | | |
|=IPv6_Enc(Pub_IPv4_Out)==>|=WKIPv6A_Enc(Pub_IPv4_Out)=>|==Pub_IPv4_Out=>|
| | | |
| | | |
|<=========IPv6PrefA_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)===================|<==Pub_IPv4_In==|
| | | |
| | | |
LAN messages are not represented in the figure.
Figure 14: Encapsulation Mode: Anycast addresses are
assigned to all PRR
2. Otherwise, all internal IPv4 traffic is encapsulated by the port
restricted device in IPv4-in-IPv6 packets (the destination IPv6
address is the one built by the port-restricted device, see
Section 4.2). As in the first bullet, the packet is forwarded to
next hop according to IPv6 routing table. If the correspondent
is not a port-restricted device, the packet is intercepted by
a-PRR or a i-PRR depending of where the correspondent is located.
This a-PRR or i-PRR proceeds to the de-encapsulation operation.
The extracted IPv4 packet is then forwarded to the IPv4
correspondent. The same behaviour as for the first bullet
applies for incoming IPv4 traffic. A flow is illustrated in
Figure 15.
+---+ +-----+ +--+
|CPE| |i-PRR| |RM|
+---+ +-----+ +--+
| | |
|=======WKIPv6A_Enc(Pub_IPv4_Out)===============>|====Pub_IPv4_Out=>|
| | |
| | |
|<======IPv6PrefA_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)===============|<==Pub_IPv4_In====|
| | |
Figure 15: Encapsulation Mode: the port restricted device builds
a destination IPv6 address
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
6.6.2.4.4. Behaviour: Binding Table Mode
The behaviour of both access and interconnection PRRs is elaborated
below:
1. If an anycast IPv6 address is configured on interfaces of all
a-PRRs:
* An (access) PRR will receive the encapsulated packets issued
from port-restricted devices. The packets are de-encapsulated
and the original IPv4 is retrieved. Then, the (access) PRR
builds a destination IPv6 address using a WKIPv6 prefix and
the destination IPv4 address. The original IPv4 packets are
then encapsulated in IPv6 packet with a source IPv6 address of
the (access) PRR and the destination IPv6 address equal to the
newly built one. The packet is forwarded to next hop
according to IPv6 routing table. The packet is intercepted by
a-PRR or a i-PRR depending of where the correspondent is
located. This a-PRR or i-PRR proceeds to the de-encapsulation
operation. The extracted IPv4 packet is then forwarded to the
IPv4 correspondent.
* Incoming IPv4 traffic is intercepted by an (interconnection)
PRR. The PRR encapsulates the received IPv4 packet in an IPv6
one using the following information:
+ The source IPv6 address is one of the global IPv6 addresses
of the PRR.
+ The destination IPv6 is built by the PRR using the
formalism defined in Section 4.2. This address is build
using a WKIPv6 prefix, the destination IPv4 address and the
destination port number. The appropriate a-PRR managing
the destination port-restricted device, among those having
the same IPv4 address, will receive the packet. This is
illustrated in Figure 16. The PRR de-encapsulates the
packet and retrieves the original IPv4 packet. The access
PRR retrieves the destination address IPv6PrefA stored in
its binding table and forwards the packet to the port
restricted device.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+---+ +-----+ +-----+ +--+
|CPE| |a-PRR| |i-PRR| |RM|
+---+ +-----+ +-----+ +--+
| | | |
|==IPv6_Enc(Pub_IPv4_Out)=>|=WKIPv6A_Enc(Pub_IPv4_Out)=>|==Pub_IPv4_Out=>|
| | | |
|<==IPv6_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)==|<==WKIPv6A_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)=|<==Pub_IPv4_In==|
| | | |
LAN messages are not represented in the figure.
Figure 16: Encapsulation Mode with a Binding table
(Anycast)
2. Otherwise, all internal IPv4 traffic is encapsulated by the port
restricted device in IPv4-in-IPv6 packets. As in the first
bullet, the packet is forwarded to next hop according to its IPv6
routing table. The packet is intercepted by a-PRR or a i-PRR
depending of where the correspondent is located. This a-PRR or
i-PRR proceeds to the de-encapsulation operation. The extracted
IPv4 packet is then forwarded to the IPv4 correspondent. The
same behaviour as for the first bullet applies for incoming IPv4
traffic. A flow example is illustrated in Figure 17.
+---+ +-----+ +--+
|CPE| |i-PRR| |RM|
+---+ +-----+ +--+
| | |
|================WKIPv6A_Enc(Pub_IPv4_Out)==============>|=Pub_IPv4_Out=>|
| | |
| +-----+ | |
| |a-PRR| | |
| +-----+ | |
| | | |
|<=IPv6PrefA_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)|<=WKIPv6A_Enc(Pub_IPv4_In)=|<=Pub_IPv4_In==|
| | | |
Figure 17: Encapsulation Mode with a Binding table
6.6.3. The IPv6 Translation-Based Mode
6.6.3.1. Context and Conditions
This mode assumes that IPv6-only terminals are deployed behind port-
restricted devices. Particularly, all DNS resolution requests are
AAAA ones [RFC3363] . Only IPv6 addresses are conveyed in DNS
responses to requesting machines.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
A dedicated ALG should be supported by the DNS infrastructure
deployed by the service provider. The main function of this ALG is
to form an IPv6 address based on a WKIPv6 prefix and a resolved IPv4
address, when no AAAA RR are available in the DNS system (following
the formalism described in Section 4.2). The WKIPv6 prefix is
configured by the service provider so as to identify that the
resulting IPv6 address is not a native one. We refer to this IPv6
prefix as WKIPv6_v4. The procedure is illustrated in Figure 18.
+--+ +---+ +---+
|M1| |CPE| |DNS|
+--+ +---+ +---+
| | |
|==(1)Request(AAAA)==>|==(2)Request(AAAA)==>|
| | |
| | +------ALG------+
| | |No available |
| | |AAAA Records, |
| | +------| |------+
| | | | | |
| | +-------v-------+
| | | Return IPv4@ |
| | | Build IPv6@ |
| | +-------+-------+
| | |
|<=(4)Response(IPv6@)=|<=(3)Response(IPv6@)=|
| | |
Figure 18: DNS ALG
In the remaining part of this section, it is assumed that M1 has
retrieved an IPv6 address to contact.
6.6.3.2. Flow Example
Figure 19 shows a message exchange that occurs in the context of
IPv6-IPv4 communications.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 38]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
+--+ +---+ +-----+ +--+
|M1| |CPE| |i-PRR| |RM|
+--+ +---+ +-----+ +--+
| | | |
|==(1)IPv6_Out==>|==(2)IPv6_Out===>|==(3)Pub_IPv4_Out==>|
| | | |
|<==(6)IPv6_In===|<==(5)IPv6_In====|<===(4)Pub_IPv4_In==|
| | | |
Figure 19: Translation Mode
Intra-domain communications are placed using IPv6 transfer
capabilities. When the remote destination is an IPv4 (which is
represented by an IPv6 address), the following exchanges are
observed:
1. M1 issues an IPv6 message destined to RM.
2. Once received by the CPE, this latter checks if the destination
address belongs to the WKIPv6_v4 prefix. If this is the case, a
NAT66 operation is executed. As a result, a new IPv6 packet is
generated.
3. This message is received by the interconnection PRR. It
retrieves IPv4 information based on IPv6 one and translates the
packet to a new IPv4 one.
4. This message is then routed using IPv4 capabilities of the
connected IPv4-only realm.
5. Once received by RM, an answer may be issued. An IPv4 packet is
then sent.
6. This IPv4 packet is received by i-PRR. It then proceeds to a
stateless NAT46 operation. The newly built IPv6 packet is
forwarded to the next hop.
7. Owing to underlying IGP configuration, the packet is received by
the appropriate CPE which checks its NAT66 table.
8. Because a session has been instantiated, a NAT66 operation is
executed. The resulting IPv6 packet is then received by M1.
6.6.3.3. Provisioning Operations
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 39]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
6.6.3.3.1. IP Connectivity Information
Unlike previous steps, no IPv4 connectivity is provided to customers.
None IPv4 packets are sent, neither by the end-user's device within
the LAN nor by the CPE itself.
IP connectivity is exclusively offered owing to IPv6 transfer
capabilities. Thus, no IPv4 connectivity information is conveyed to
end-user's device. In the meantime, an IPv6 prefix (IPv6Pref) is
assigned to the end-user device (CPE or terminal). This assigned
IPv6 prefix follows the constraints listed in Section 4.
As already mentioned in Section 6.3, the service provider may
allocate to the customer's device a second prefix IPv6 prefix which
is not IPv4-mapped.
6.6.3.3.2. Provisioning Procedure
In addition to what has been mentioned for Step_1 (IPv6 part), a
specific policy should be installed so as to "guide" the behaviour of
the NAT66 function introduced in "Handling Outgoing Traffic" section.
This specific policy needs to be aware of the port range allocated to
the port-restricted device. It is for further study to defined how
the port range can be allocated through IPv6 means (e.g. through a
new DHCPv6 option).
6.6.3.4. Port Restricted Device's Behaviour and Supported Functions
6.6.3.4.1. Port Range Restriction
The port restriction is applied only if the destination IPv6 address
belongs to the WKIPv6_v4 prefix. Otherwise, no port restriction is
enforced, since it is assumed to be a native IPv6 communication.
A new NAT66 function should be supported by the CPE. This NAT66 is
not required to be supported if a directly connected terminal is
used. But then, its address selection process should follow the
recommendations listed in "Handling Outgoing Traffic" sub-section.
6.6.3.4.2. Handling Outgoing Traffic
The following procedure is applied:
o If the destination IPv6 address belongs to the WKIPv6_v4 prefix
(this means the destination is not a native IPv6 host and an IPv6-
IPv4 interconnection node will be crossed in the delivery path),
the port-restricted device proceeds to NAT66 operations.
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 40]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
Concretely:
* A port number from the Port Range is selected, this port
replaces the original source port number in the transport part
of the received IPv6 packet;
* A source IPv6 address IPv6PrefA is selected under IPv6Pref (see
Section 4) in such a way that the port value contained in the
port part of this IPv6PrefA address is equal to the selected
port number;
* The received IPv6 (from a machine in the LAN) packet is then
translated to a new IPv6 one with the newly built IPv6PrefA
address as source address and the newly selected source port
number in transport part.
o Otherwise, the packet is forwarded to the next IPv6 hop.
6.6.3.4.3. Handling Incoming Traffic
The following procedure is applied:
o If the source IPv6 address belongs to the WKIPv6_v4 prefix, the
port-restricted device proceeds to NAT66 operations according to
its active NAT sessions.
o Otherwise, the packet is forwarded to the next IPv6 hop in the
LAN.
6.6.3.5. PRR Behaviour
6.6.3.5.1. Supported Functions
Unlike previous steps, no encapsulation function is required to be
supported by the PRR. Nevertheless, a stateless IPv6-IPv4 (and vice
versa) translation must be supported.
6.6.3.5.2. Localization
No PRRs are required anymore to be maintained in the access segment.
Only PRRs located in the interconnection segment should be deployed.
These nodes should be near ASBRs used to interconnect with IPv4-only
realms.
6.6.3.5.3. Behaviour
The behaviour of the PRR is as follows:
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 41]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
1. Traffic received from an IPv4-only realm: The PRR extracts
destination IPv4 address, source IPv4 address, destination port
number and source port number. A new IPv6 packet is generated
following these rules:
* The destination and source port numbers of the generated
packet are the same as the original IPv4 one.
* The destination IPv6 address follows the formalisms described
in Section 4.2 using a WKIPv6 configured by the service
provider.
* The source IPv6 address follows the formalism described in
Section 4.2 using a WKIPv6 provided by the service provider.
2. Traffic destined to an IPv4-only realm: A new IPv4 packet is
generated according to these rules:
* The destination and source port numbers of the generated
packet are the same as the original IPv6 one.
* The destination IPv4 address is extracted from the destination
IPv6 address of the received IPv6 packet. See Section 4.3 for
more information about the used IPv6-to-IPv4 address mapping
function.
* The source IPv4 address is extracted from the source IPv6
address of the received IPv6 packet using the IPv6-to-IPv4
address mapping function defined in Section 4.3.
6.6.3.6. Routing Considerations
IPv4 IGP protocols are not anymore enabled in the core network. Only
IPv6 routing table is maintained by involved routers.
Inter-domain IPv4 connectivity is maintained with IPv4-only realms.
IPv4 network prefixes are mapped to IPv6 prefixes (using a WKIPv6
prefix provided by the local service provider) which are injected in
the IPv6 IGP deployed protocol.
6.7. Analysis and IPv6 Migration Scenarios
As aforementioned, the deployment of IPv6 is not a problem per se.
The main issue is how to ensure a smooth interconnection between IPv4
and IPv6 realms. Interworking functions and procedures should be
deployed. Currently proposed mechanisms rely on statefull
interconnection nodes (e.g. NAT44 CGN or DS-Lite CGN) or requires
that dual-stack nodes (including end hosts and intermediary service
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 42]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
nodes) are deployed everywhere. The first category suffers from a
performance issue and the second one is not realistic approach (since
the adoption of IPv6 may require several years).
This document presents solutions which solve the problem of IPv4
address shortage and which prepare the migration to IPv6. As
described in previous sections, three steps have been identified and
specified. Table 1 gives an overview of the supported IP version per
network segment and for each step. The proposed solution requires
the migration of core segments to IPv6. Dual stacks would be
maintained only at interconnection segments. Table 2 presents the
ratio of IPv6 traffic when the solution is deployed. This table
illustrates the invocation of IPv6 capabilities for the delivery of
IP connectivity service. Owing to the deployment of the proposed
solution, service providers have deterministic means to increase IPv6
traffic.
+--------+--------------+--------------+-----------------+
| Step | Access | Core | Interconnection |
+--------+--------------+--------------+-----------------+
| Step_0 | DS Network | IPv4 Network | IPv4 Network |
| Step_1 | DS Network | DS Network | DS Network |
| Step_2 | IPv6 Network | IPv6 Network | DS Network |
+--------+--------------+--------------+-----------------+
Table 1: Supported IP version per network segment
+------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| Step | %IPv6 traffic | %IPv6 traffic core |
| | Access | |
+------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
| Step_0 | at least 50% | variable |
| Step_1 | at least 50% | at least 50% |
| Step_2 (Encapsulation) | 100% | 100% |
| Step_2 (Translation) | 100% | 100% |
+------------------------+---------------------+--------------------+
Table 2: % of IPv6
Table 3 lists the required function/node to be supported in order to
ensure heterogeneous communication involving peers located in both
IPv4 and IPv6 realms. Core network segment does not require the
deployment of non IPv6 standards elements. Stateless functions
(denoted as PRR in this document) are introduced first at access
segment and then in the interconnection segment. Intra-domain
communications are optimised from an IGP perspective. The presence
of a-PRR allows a natural traffic distribution among deployed nodes.
IPv4 traffic received from adjacent domains is handled by the i-PRR
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 43]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
and then routed to its final destination possibly through the a-PRR
depending of the configuration (binding table with one line per port-
restricted device or stateless mapping between shared IPv4 address
and IPv6 prefixes).
+------------------------+------------+------+-----------------+
| Step | Access | Core | Interconnection |
+------------------------+------------+------+-----------------+
| Step_0 | a-PRR | None | None |
| Step_1 | a-PRR | None | i-PRR |
| Step_2 (Encapsulation) | a-PRR/None | None | i-PRR |
| Step_2 (Translation) | None | None | i-PRR |
+------------------------+------------+------+-----------------+
Table 3: Required nodes per network segment
Table 4 lists the required functions to be enabled in the context of
each step.
+-----------------+-------------------------+-----------------------+
| Step | port-restricted device | a/i-PRR |
+-----------------+-------------------------+-----------------------+
| Step_0 | Port Restricted IPv4, | Stateless |
| | IPv4-in-IPv6 | IPv4-in-IPv6 |
| | de-encapsulation | encapsulation |
| Step_1 | Port Restricted IPv4, | stateless |
| | IPv4-in-IPv6 | IPv4-in-IPv6 |
| | de-encapsulation | encapsulation |
| Step_2 | Port Restricted IPv4, | Stateless |
| (Encapsulation) | IPv4-in-IPv6 | IPv4-in-IPv6 |
| | encapsulation, | encapsulation, |
| | IPv4-in-IPv6 | IPv4-in-IPv6 |
| | de-encapsulation | de-encapsulation |
| Step_2 | Port Restricted NAT66 | Stateless NAT46/NAT64 |
| (Translation) | | |
+-----------------+-------------------------+-----------------------+
Table 4: Required Functions
Various migration paths may be adopted by service providers based on
backward compatibility considerations and also to the service
portfolio.
For service providers which offer already an IPv4-based connectivity
service, several migration paths may be followed, depending on the
service provider's objectives and profile, to adopt IPv6 without
breaking global connectivity (i.e. Reach both IPv4 and IPv6 realms):
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 44]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
1. Deploy IPv6 with no major risks on currently offered services: a
candidate migration path would be (ordered steps):
A. Deploy first the procedure described in
[I-D.boucadair-port-range]. Then, IPv6 may be activated in
the access segment when deploying Step_0. Once IPv6 is
deployed in core network, the service provider should
activate Step_1 mainly by deploying PRR at interconnection
segments. Once the connectivity service is stable, a final
step would be to adopt Step_2 (encapsulation mode) and then
Step_2 (translation mode).
B. Deploy first Step_0, then adopt Step_1. Once the service is
stable, move to Step_2 (encapsulation mode) and latter to
Step_2 (translation mode).
2. Aggressive position with regards to IPv6 deployment: For this
category of service providers, the migration path would be either
A. either deploy Step_1 then Step_2 (encapsulation mode) and
finally Step_2 (translation mode).
B. or deploy Step_2 (encapsulation mode) and then Step_2
(translation mode).
For new service providers which do not have backward compatibility
requirement, the following deployment path may be adopted to ensure a
global IPv4/IPv6 connectivity service.
Deploy Step_2 (encapsulation mode) and then migrate to Step_2
(translation mode).
7. IANA Considerations
This document makes no request of IANA.
Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
RFC.
8. Security Considerations
TBC
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 45]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
9. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Pierrick MORAND for his review,
support and suggestions.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
10.2. Informative References
[I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign]
Bajko, G., Savolainen, T., Boucadair, M., and P. Levis,
"Port Restricted IP Address Assignment",
draft-bajko-pripaddrassign-01 (work in progress),
March 2009.
[I-D.boucadair-dhcpv6-shared-address-option]
Boucadair, M., Levis, P., Grimault, J., Savolainen, T.,
and G. Bajko, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
(DHCPv6) Options for Shared IP Addresses Solutions",
draft-boucadair-dhcpv6-shared-address-option-00 (work in
progress), May 2009.
[I-D.boucadair-port-range]
Boucadair, M., Levis, P., Bajko, G., and T. Savolainen,
"IPv4 Connectivity Access in the Context of IPv4 Address
Exhaustion: Port Range based IP Architecture",
draft-boucadair-port-range-02 (work in progress),
July 2009.
[I-D.boucadair-pppext-portrange-option]
Boucadair, M., Levis, P., Grimault, J., and A.
Villefranque, "Port Range Configuration Options for PPP
IPCP", draft-boucadair-pppext-portrange-option-01 (work in
progress), July 2009.
[I-D.despres-sam]
Despres, R., "Stateless Address Mapping (SAM) Avoiding
NATs and restoring the end-to-end model in IPv6",
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 46]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
draft-despres-sam-02 (work in progress), March 2009.
[I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite]
Durand, A., Droms, R., Haberman, B., and J. Woodyatt,
"Dual-stack lite broadband deployments post IPv4
exhaustion", draft-ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite-00 (work
in progress), March 2009.
[I-D.levis-behave-ipv4-shortage-framework]
Levis, P., Boucadair, M., Grimault, J., and A.
Villefranque, "IPv4 Address Shortage: Needs and Open
Issues", draft-levis-behave-ipv4-shortage-framework-02
(work in progress), June 2009.
[RFC3363] Bush, R., Durand, A., Fink, B., Gudmundsson, O., and T.
Hain, "Representing Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)
Addresses in the Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 3363,
August 2002.
Authors' Addresses
Mohamed Boucadair (editor)
France Telecom
42 rue des Coutures
BP 6243
Caen Cedex 4 14066
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com
Pierre Levis
France Telecom
Email: pierre.levis@orange-ftgroup.com
Jean-Luc Grimault
France Telecom
Email: jeanluc.grimault@orange-ftgroup.com
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 47]
Internet-Draft IPv4-IPv6 Co-existence July 2009
Alain Villefranque
France Telecom
Email: alain.villefranque@orange-ftgroup.com
Mohamed Kassi-Lahlou
France Telecom
Email: mohamed.kassilahlou@orange-ftgroup.com
Boucadair, et al. Expires January 14, 2010 [Page 48]