Internet Engineering Task Force                                  G. Chen
Internet-Draft                                                   B. Zhou
Intended status: Informational                              China Mobile
Expires: January 7, 2010                                    July 6, 2009


                Host-based Translation Problem Statement
                       draft-chen-host-ipv6-ps-00

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 7, 2010.

Copyright Notice

   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



Chen & Zhou              Expires January 7, 2010                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                Host-IPv6-PS                     July 2009


   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

   When operators start to customize user terminals, host-based IPv6
   translation will be feasible.  Host-based translation should overcome
   single-point failure problems and support various connections between
   two IP families networks simultaneously.  In addition, legacy IPv4
   applications should not be modified.  This document will discuss
   host-based translation applicable scenarios and corresponding issues.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Host-based translation scenarios and problems . . . . . . . . . 3
     2.1.  Host-based translation scenarios  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     2.2.  Problems  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   5.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5


























Chen & Zhou              Expires January 7, 2010                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                Host-IPv6-PS                     July 2009


1.  Introduction

   Current network is mostly depending on IPv4.  And, several
   sophisticated technologies have been proposed to prolong the IPv4
   lifetime, such as NAPT, A+P[A+P] .  Although these solutions could
   alleviate IPv4 depletion pressure in a short term, the transition
   from IPv4 to IPv6 is still a steady trend of network development.

   Technical solutions of IPv6 transition could be divided into three
   categories, namely dual-stack, tunneling and translation technology.

   Dual-stack hosts can communicate with both the IPv4 and IPv6 hosts,
   but it can not help to resolve the IPv4 address exhaustion problems.
   The tunneling technology can connect IPv4 networks across IPv6-only
   networks and IPv6 networks across IPv4-only networks, thus one IP
   family communication is transparent with another IP family.

   The translation technology can help the communications between two
   address families.  With regard to whether deploy translator on hosts
   or networks, the majority solutions would like to choose the latter
   since modifications on a numerous hosts were treated as not easy
   works.  However, host-based translation schemes would progress more
   easily in recent time, since more and more operators start to
   customize hosts for their subscribers.

   In this document, host-based translation scenarios and underlying
   problems have been described.


2.   Host-based translation scenarios and problems

2.1.   Host-based translation scenarios

   Figure 1 shows host-based translation scenarios.  Translator modules
   have been deployed on H1 and H3 located in IPv6 only network.  And,
   both conventional IPv4 applications and IPv6 applications have been
   installed.  H2 is legacy IPv4 host located in IPv4 site.

   With regard to this scenario, H1 and H3 might maintain following
   service connections simultaneously.

   o  case 1: H1 and H4 initiate a service call with H2 using a IPv4
      application

   o  case 2: H1 initiates a service all with the IPv6 application of H3
      using a IPv4 application





Chen & Zhou              Expires January 7, 2010                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                Host-IPv6-PS                     July 2009


   o  case 3: H3 initiates a service call with H2 using a IPv6
      application

   o  case 4: H1 initiates a service call with the IPv4 application of
      H3 using a IPv4 application


          +-----------------------------+       +--------------------+
          |IPv6 site     4/6            |       | IPv4 site          |
          |           +--------+        |       |                    |
          |           |   H1   |        |       |                    |
          |           +--------+        |       |                    |
          |                |            |       |                    |
          |  4/6      +--------+        |       |                    |
          |+-------+  | Access |   +--------+   |+----------+  +----+|
          ||  H3   |--| Router |-- |  NAT   |---|| Internet |--| H2 ||
          |+-------+  +--------+   +--------+   |+----------+  +----+|
          |                |            |       |     |           4  |
          |           +--------+        |       | +--------+         |
          |           |  DNS1  |        |       | |  DNS2  |         |
          |           +--------+        |       | +--------+         |
          |              AAAA           |       |     A              |
          +-----------------------------+       +--------------------+


                                 Figure 1

2.2.  Problems

   From individual case point-of-view, dual-stack-lite[DS-Lite] can
   support case 1, and BIA [RFC3338] or BIS [RFC2767] can support the
   case 2, and NAT64[NAT64] can support case 3.  There are no solutions
   to perform case 4.

   According to the analysis, According to the analysis, existing
   solution can!_t satisfy the demands of maintaining above all
   potential communications in the 4/6 host at one time.  Furthermore,
   following problems should be considered.

   o  It is hard to modify numerous conventional IPv4 applications, when
      the hosts only have an IPv6 connection

   o  The hosts located in IPv6 site usually do not initiate query to
      DNS4 server, where IPv4 peer record is stored

   o  The hosts usually do not identify peer application type, thus
      translation handling can not be performed correctly




Chen & Zhou              Expires January 7, 2010                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                Host-IPv6-PS                     July 2009


3.  IANA Considerations

   This memo includes no request to IANA.


4.  Security Considerations

   It needs to be further identified.


5.  Normative References

   [A+P]      Bush, R., "The A+P Approach to the IPv4 Address Shortage",
              draft-ymbk-aplusp-03 (work in progress), March 2009.

   [DS-Lite]  Durand, A., "Dual-stack lite broadband deployments post
              IPv4 exhaustion", draft-ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite-00
              (work in progress), March 2009.

   [NAT64]    Bagnulo, M., "NAT64: Network Address and Protocol
              Translation from  IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers",
              draft-bagnulo-behave-nat64-03.txt (work in progress),
              March 2009.

   [RFC2767]  Tsuchiya, K., HIGUCHI, H., and Y. Atarashi, "Dual Stack
              Hosts using the "Bump-In-the-Stack" Technique (BIS)",
              RFC 2767, February 2000.

   [RFC3338]  Lee, S., Shin, M-K., Kim, Y-J., Nordmark, E., and A.
              Durand, "Dual Stack Hosts Using "Bump-in-the-API" (BIA)",
              RFC 3338, October 2002.


Authors' Addresses

   Gang Chen
   China Mobile
   53A,Xibianmennei Ave.,
   Xuanwu District,
   Beijing  100053
   China

   Email: phdgang@gmail.com








Chen & Zhou              Expires January 7, 2010                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                Host-IPv6-PS                     July 2009


   Bo Zhou
   China Mobile
   53A,Xibianmennei Ave.,
   Xuanwu District,
   Beijing  100053
   China

   Email: zhouboyj@chinamobile.com











































Chen & Zhou              Expires January 7, 2010                [Page 6]