Internet-Draft X. Chen
Expires: July 2006 Orange PCS Ltd
J. Rinne
Nokia
J. Wiljakka
Nokia
M. Watson
Nortel Networks
July, 2006
Problem Statement for MIPv6 Interactions with GPRS/UMTS
Packet Filtering
draft-chen-mip6-gprs-05.txt
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
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 July, 2006.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This document provides an analysis of certain inter-working problems
between IPv6 nodes running Mobile IPv6, at least one of which is
connected to a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)
specified General Packet Radio Service/Universal Mobile Tele-
communications System (GPRS/UMTS) network. The inter-working problems
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
are caused by some specific packet filtering operations at the edge
of the GPRS/UMTS network which are applied to control access to the
GPRS/UMTS services and network resources. However, we believe that
other scenarios may exist in which similar packet filtering
operations may be applied and that similar problems would arise in
these more general scenarios.
The GPRS Gateway Support Node (GGSN) checks the source address or
the destination address in the basic IPv6 header of incoming or
outgoing IP datagrams against a set of packet filtering information
established during the GPRS/UMTS session set-up. The packet filtering
information remains stable during the sessions and independent of
Mobile IP. When MIPv6 is activated by either end of the IPv6 mobile
nodes, the packet filtering will fail to perform properly and
subsequently block the traffic due to the mismatch between the packet
filters and the current source address or destination address in the
basic IPv6 header of the IP datagrams to and from the IPv6 mobile
nodes.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Scope of this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Packet Filtering in GPRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1 Mobile Terminal Defined Packet Filtering for GPRS Services . 5
3.2 Mobile Terminal Defined Packet Filtering for IMS Services. . 5
3.3 Network Service Defined Packet Filtering for IMS Services. . 5
4. Problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1 GPRS node, B, acting as Correspondent Node . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.1 Mobile Terminal defined Packet Filtering for GPRS Services . 6
4.1.2 Network Service defined Packet Filtering for IMS Services . 8
4.2 GPRS node, B, acting as Mobile Node . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.1 Mobile Terminal defined Packet Filtering for GPRS Services . 10
4.2.2 Network Service defined packet filtering for IMS Services . 11
4.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5. Problem generalisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1 User security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.2 Network security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 14
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 17
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
1. Introduction
Mobile IPv6 [1] allows a mobile node to maintain its IP connectivity
regardless of its network attachment point. Packets sent to the
mobile node may still use its home address, or the care-of address of
the mobile node as the destination address. The mobile node may
continue to communicate with its existing communication peers
(stationary or mobile) by using its topologically correct IP
addresses. An important and highly desirable feature of mobile IP
based mobility is that the control is transparent to transport and
higher-layer protocols and applications, i.e. the higher layer
protocols and applications function as if the mobile node is
"stationary".
Packet filtering in GPRS/UMTS [2] is used for differentiating
GPRS/UMTS connections and Quality of Service (QoS), and protecting
the network resources and services against Theft of Service attacks.
It is achieved by checking the header information of the incoming and
outgoing IP datagrams against a set of packet filtering information.
The packet filtering information is defined or authorised by the
application layer entities during the set-up of the GPRS/UMTS and IP
Multimedia Subsystem sessions operating independently of Mobile IP.
This pre-defined packet filtering information is used by the GGSN
to check the header of incoming or outgoing IP datagrams so as to
select the appropriate GPRS/UMTS sessions with QoS or control the
access to network resources and IMS services based on the operator
defined local policies. For example, the Service Based Local Policy
control (SBLP) [5][6] in UMTS IP Multimedia Subsystems (IMS)[4]
enables the GGSN to check the destination address for outgoing IP
datagrams according to policy information authorised by the Policy
Decision Function during the IMS session establishment.
When Mobile IPv6 is activated, an IPv6 node sends IP datagrams using
Care-of Address as either the destination address or source address
while its home address is carried in the extension headers. The
change of source address or destination address in the basic IPv6
header from the mobile node's home address to its care-of address or
from one care-of address to another during a session leads to a
mismatch with the header information such as the source address or
destination address in the set of parameters for packet filtering
information and, as a result, the discard of incoming or outgoing IP
datagrams by the GGSN.
In the following sections, the basic packet filtering operations in
GPRS/UMTS are described and followed by the analysis of the failure
of those operations when Mobile IPv6 is activated.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
1.1 Scope of this Document
This document provides information about the potential problems for
mobile terminals to use Mobile IPv6 when at least one of them
is connected to the GPRS/UMTS networks. It analyses the scenarios
when Mobile IPv6 is applied and how the problems occur.
Similar problems may also exist in CDMA2000 as defined by 3GPP2
and other Internet technologies such as firewalls. But the
discussions in this document are intended to apply to 3GPP compliant
GPRS/UMTS networks.
1.2 Abbreviations
3GPP Third Generation Partnership Project
3GPP2 Third Generation Partnership Project Two
GGSN Gateway GPRS Support Node (default router for 3GPP User
Equipment)
GPRS General Packet Radio Service
IMS IP Multimedia (Core Network) Subsystem, 3GPP Release 5
IPv6-only part of the network
NSIS Next Steps In Signalling
PDP Packet Data Protocol
RSVP Resource Reservation Protocol
SIP Session Initiation Protocol
SBLP Service Based Local Policy
TFT Traffic Flow Template
UE User Equipment, for example a UMTS mobile handset
UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
2. Terminology
GPRS services those services provided or accessed by the GPRS/UMTS
networks. They can be a single media service with one
traffic flow or a multimedia service with several
traffic flows.
IMS Services those services provided by the IP Multimedia (Core
Network) Subsystems (IMS). They are distinguished
from the general GPRS Services as defined above in
that the latter are not provided by the IMS.
3. Packet Filtering in 3GPP Networks
The following sections list some packet filtering operations in GPRS/
UMTS. It is not intended to exhaust all the possible application
scenarios for packet filtering operations in 3G networks such as
those used by firewalls.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
3.1 Mobile Terminal Defined Packet Filtering for GPRS Services
The GPRS Services are defined to be those services that are not run
on the IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) [4]. IMS is defined by 3GPP to
provide SIP Based IP multimedia services. To support GPRS services
with more than one traffic flow with differentiated QoS, GPRS/UMTS
networks support multiple simultaneous sessions as typically
represented by multiple secondary PDP (Packet Data Protocol)
Contexts[2] in association with one Primary PDP Context for each of
its IP address. Each GPRS/UMTS session may be assigned specific QoS
with the necessary network resources (including radio resources). An
incoming IP datagram from the external public data network such as
Internet will be checked by the GGSN, to decide if there is an
existing GPRS/UMTS session to deliver the datagram through the
network to the mobile terminal. The basic IPv6 header as well as
some higher layer information such as the ports is checked against a
Traffic Flow Template (TFT) [3] that contains the packet filtering
information such as the IPv4/IPv6 Source Addresses, Protocol
Identifier, Source/Destination Ports, etc.
The TFT is generated by the mobile node and recorded by the GGSN upon
a successful establishment of a GPRS/UMTS session for the mobile
node. The TFT only applies when secondary PDP contexts are activated
in which case only one PDP context among both the primary PDP context
and secondary PDP context(s) is allowed not to have a TFT associated
with it.
The GGSN will use at least one of those packet filter parameters
defined in the TFT, primarily the Source Address, to check if an
appropriate GPRS/UMTS session has been set up for incoming traffic.
The GGSN searches for a GPRS/UMTS session with the TFT that contains
the parameter values matching those carried in the datagram. For
example, the Source IP Address field of each existing TFT will be
compared with the source address carried in the basic IPv6 header of
an IPv6 datagram. If no matching TFT is found, the datagram may be
discarded.
3.2 Mobile Terminal Defined Packet Filtering for IMS Services
For a UE running IMS Services, the GGSN ignores any UE supplied TFT.
The filters in that TFT are not installed in the packet processing
table at the GGSN. The packet filtering for IMS services is based
on the Service Based Local Policy as discussed in the next section.
3.3 Network Service Defined Packet Filtering for IMS Services
In IMS, Service Based Local Policy (SBLP) [5][6] is enforced by the
GGSN to authorise and control the access to the IMS services and the
GPRS/UMTS network resources based on operator defined local policies.
The SBLP can be applied to both the traffic leaving the GPRS/UMTS
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
networks (uplink) and the traffic entering the GPRS/UMTS network
(downlink).
An IMS service request, a GPRS/UMTS session set-up request and the
subsequent data packets originated by the mobile terminal will be
checked by the GGSN against a set of policy control information
parameters such as Destination Address, Destination Port Number,
Transport Protocol ID, etc. The policy control information is issued
as an authorisation from the IMS application layer (the IMS/Policy
Decision Function -PDF). An IP datagram carrying an IMS service
request or user data will be blocked by the GGSN if mismatch is found
between the authorised policy information and those carried by the IP
datagram. For example, an IMS service request or a VoIP packet will
be blocked by the GGSN if the destination address carried by the IP
datagram does not match that authorised by the Policy Decision
Function. This is designed for protecting GPRS/UMTS and IMS against
ToS attacks.
4. Problem statement
The problem is stated in terms of an IPv6 node, A, communicating
with a second IPv6 node, B. B is connected to the GPRS/UMTS network.
The Internet or IP networks are between A's local network and B's
GPRS/UMTS network.
We consider in turn the cases in which the GPRS node, B, is acting
either as a Correspondent Node or as a Mobile Node. For each case,
we consider sub-cases related to terminal defined filters
(i.e. TFTs) and network defined filters (i.e. SBLP).
Further, for each sub-case, we further consider the use of Home Agent
tunnelling and Route Optimisation by the Mobile Node.
4.1 GPRS node, B, acting as Correspondent Node
This is the case where A is a Mobile Node that is having multimedia
sessions with a Correspondent Node, B. B is connected to a GPRS/UMTS
network. The sessions are set up when A is connected to its home
network link.
4.1.1 Mobile Terminal defined Packet Filtering for GPRS Services
Upon a successful establishment of multimedia sessions between A and
B, each session is associated with a TFT packet filter(s) defined by
B which have A's home address as the source address for IP datagrams
sent from A to B. The GGSN uses these packet filters to decide which
PDP Context to use to deliver an incoming IP datagram to B.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
4.1.1.1 Home Agent Tunnelling
The IP datagrams sent from A to B use the (reverse) tunnel from A's
current CoA to its HA. IP datagrams exit the tunnel at A's home agent
and transmit to B using A's home address as the source address. Upon
arriving at the GGSN, the IP datagrams' source address matches the
IPv6 source address (A's home address) recorded in one of the TFT
filters and, if other filtering parameters are matched as well, the
IP datagrams will be delivered to B through the PDP Context
corresponding to the TFT. No specific issues are identified for this
case.
4.1.1.2 Route Optimisation
When A moves away from its home network link and connects to a
foreign network link and attempts the Mobile IPv6 binding update
procedures, it starts sending IP datagrams to B directly using its
CoA address as the Source Address and carrying its Home Address in
the Home Address destination option extension header.
When such an IP datagram sent from A arrives at the GGSN, it does not
match the TFT packet filters containing A's home address as the IPv6
source address. As result, two possible decisions can be made by the
GGSN; If there happens to be a different PDP Context with a TFT which
does match A's CoA or a PDP Context without an associated TFT, the
GGSN will decide to use it to deliver the IP datagram to B. But in
this case it may not receive the correct Quality of Service
treatment. Additionally, the PDP Context with the Quality of Service
appropriate for delivering the IP datagram is left unused.
Figure 1 shows an example of two GPRS sessions that are distinguished
by GGSN using TFT packet filters, TFT1 and TFT2,respectively.
TFT +--------+
Packet / \ CN
MN Filter / TFT1->Sess.1 \+--+
+-+ +---------+ +--------+ +----+/----->----------|B |
|A|->-| Foreign |->-|Internet|->-|GGSN| ----->----------| |
| | | Network | +--------+ +----+\ TFT2->Sess.2 +--+
+-+ +---------+ | \ /
| \ /
| +----------+
|
/\ |
|| |
|| |
+---------+ |
| Home |-------------+
| Network |
+---------+
Figure 1. Route Optimization with TFT-based Packet Filtering in GGSN
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
Alternatively the GGSN will discard the IP datagram if all sessions
have TFTs and none of them match the incoming packet.
The first IP datagram sent out by A will carry the Care-of Test
Init message of the Return Routability Procedure. If this message is
dropped, then Route Optimisation will not complete, and IP datagrams
from A to B will continue to be routed via the Home Agent instead
(see Section 4.1.1.1).
If, instead, this message is delivered to B by the GGSN, the Return
Routability procedure may complete and subsequent datagrams will be
routed in the same way as the Care-of Test Init. The session with
optimised route from A to B will therefore continue.
The major problem is then that the IP datagrams will not receive the
correct Quality of Service treatment. Since UMTS Quality of Service
can involve small constant bit-rate bandwidth reservations, this can
cause a complete loss of service, if the incorrect QoS treatment
involves a path with too low a bandwidth or no bandwidth guarantee at
all.
In addition, extra complexity or even difficulties will be incurred
in the system with respect to PDP Contexts and network resources,
especially, the radio resources, that remain unused but are being
paid for by the user.
4.1.2 Network Service defined Packet Filtering for IMS Services
4.1.2.1 Home Agent tunnelling
We have not identified any issues with this case, for the same reason
as discussed in Section 4.1.1.1.
4.1.2.2 Route Optimisation
When IMS multimedia sessions are set up between A and B, the SBLP
Policy Control authorises IP datagrams to be sent from B to A's home
address using assigned GPRS/UMTS network resources and the associated
QoS. When A moves away from its home network link and connects to
foreign network link, Mobile IPv6 Route Optimisation may be used to
allow B to continue sending IP datagrams to A by using A's CoA.
Upon arrival at the GGSN, they will not match the SBLP filter for
the session which is authorised only for destination equal to A's
home address. SBLP filters are associated with the particular UMTS
QoS reservation (PDP Context) for the session. If B continues to use
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
this QoS reservation for these packets, the GGSN will drop them as
they do not match the filter.
Figure 2 shows an example of SBLP packet filtering for IP datagrams
sent from B through IMS sessions, 1 and 2, to A.
+----------+
| SBLP |
| Control |
| Function |
+----------+
| +----------+
| / \ CN
MN | / IMS Sess. 1 \ +--+
+-+ +---------+ +--------+ +----+/-----<---------- |B |
|A|---| Foreign |---|Internet|---|GGSN| -----<---------- | |
| | | Network | +--------+ +----+\ IMS Sess. 2 /+--+
+-+ +---------+ | \ /
| \ /
| +----------+
|
/\ |
|| |
|| |
+--------+ |
| Home |--------+
| Network|
+--------+
Figure 2. Route Optimization with SBLP-based Packet Filtering in GGSN
In practice, as discussed in Section 4.1.1.2, the Return Routability
procedure requires that there is a route for the Care-of Test Init
message from A to B. A route from B to A for the Care-of Test itself
is also required.
The means by which outgoing MIP control packets are allocated to QoS
reservation on the PDP Context by the UE are undefined in 3GPP, but
we note that such a message would not pass the SBLP filters (as
described above).
If the message is routed (i.e. on a different QoS reservation), then
Route Optimisation can be established with the consequences as
described above.
Similar considerations to those of Section 4.1.1.2 apply to IP
datagrams sent from A to B.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
4.2 GPRS node, B, acting as Mobile Node
This is the case where the GPRS node, B, is acting as MIPv6 Mobile
Node and has a live session such as VoIP with a Correspondent Node,
A. The MN, B, connects to the GPRS network after leaving either a
GPRS network or non-GPRS network. Therefore, the current GPRS network
is NOT taken to be B's home network but a foreign network.
4.2.1 Mobile Terminal defined Packet Filtering for GPRS Services
4.2.1.1 Home Agent Tunnelling
When B moves away from its home network link and connects to GPRS
network link, a PDP Context is set up and associated with a TFT
filter containing A's address as the Source Address for IP datagrams
sent from A to B.
Figure 3 shows an example of two PDP Contexts representing two GPRS
sessions, 1 and 2, that are distinguished by GGSN using TFT filters,
TFT1 and TFT2, for incoming IP datagrams to be delivered to B.
TFT +--------+
Packet / \
Filter / \ MN
+------+ TFT1-Sess.1+---+
*****| |---->-------| |
+-->--| GGSN | | B |
|*****| |---->-------| |
CN +-------+ | +------+ TFT2-Sess.2+---+
+---+ | Local | +--------+ | \ GPRS /
| A |->-|Network|->-|Internet|== \ Network /
+---+ | A | +--------+ | +--------+
+-------+ |
| +------+
| | Home | /\
|...********|+----+| ||
+-------<---|| HA || ||
...********|+----+|
| Net- |
| work |
+------+
Figure 3. HA Tunnelling with TFT-based Packet Filtering in GGSN
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
The IP datagrams sent from A to B may use Home Agent Tunnelling from
B's Home Agent to its current CoA. The IP datagrams tunnelled from
B's Home Agent to B's CoA have the Home Agent address as the source
address in the outer header, while the TFT filter associated with the
existing session has A's address as the Source Address. When the IP
datagrams arrive at the GGSN, the source address in the outer header
does not match the Source Address in the TFT template associated with
the session. As a result, the IP datagrams may be discarded by the
GGSN or provided with incorrect QoS treatment.
4.2.1.2 Route Optimisation
For the Return Routability Procedure to complete, there needs to be
a route from HA to B to deliver the Home Test messages. If no
matching TFT is found by the GGSN for the tunnelled Home Test
Messages and the GGSN chooses to drop the message, the Return
Routability procedure will fail and, as a result, the Route
Optimisation will not take place.
If tunnelled packets are routed at all from the Home Agent to B, then
the Return Routability procedure can complete successfully.
Packets from A are then sent directly to B's Care-of Address. These
will be correctly filtered by the TFTs and then delivered through the
corresponding PDP Context to B.
4.2.2 Network Service defined packet filtering for IMS Services
4.2.2.1 Home Agent Tunnelling
When B moves away from its home network link and connects to a GPRS
network, it requests and acquires an IMS session with terminal A with
authorised SBLP information containing A's address as the Destination
Address for IP datagrams sent from B to A.
When Home Agent Tunnelling operation mode is used, B uses a
(reverse) tunnel from its CoA to its Home Agent to send IP datagrams
to A. In the reverse tunnel, the IP datagrams tunnelled from B carry
its Home Agent address as the destination.
Figure 4 shows an example of two IMS sessions, each of which is
associated with a SBLP filter, SBLP1 and SBLP2, for IP datagrams to
be sent to the authorised destination, i.e. A's address.
When the IP datagrams in an IP-in-IP tunnel arrive at the GGSN, GGSN
will find no authorised SBLP matching the destination indicated by
the outer header of the tunnelled IP datagrams, and it will block
and drop them.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
TFT +-----------+
Packet / \
Filter / SBLP1 - Sess.1\ MN
+--------+*************** +---+
*****| |----<-----------| |
|--<--| GGSN | SBLP2 - Sess.2 | B |
|*****| |----<-----------| |
CN +-------+ | +--------+****************+---+
+---+ | Local | +--------+ | \ /
| A |-<-|Network|-<-|Internet|== \ GPRS Network /
+---+ | | +--------+ | +------------+
+-------+ |
| +------+
| | Home | /\
| ********|+----+| ||
+------->---|| HA || ||
********|+----+|
| Net- |
---<---| work |
+------+
Figure 4. HA Tunnelling with SBLP-based Packet Filtering in GGSN
4.2.2.2 Route Optimisation
When Route Optimisation is used, IP datagrams from A to B (and B to
A) use B's Care-of Address as destination (resp. source) and
therefore will not match any of the established SBLP filters. This
is because the pre-established SBLP filters authorise IP datagrams
sent to B's Home Address to enter the GPRS/UMTS network. These will
be either blocked or carried with inappropriate QoS treatment.
The Figure 5 shows an example of filtering IP datagrams
sent from A directly to B using route optimisation passing an SBLP
filter SBLP1 or SBLP2. Both authorise the use of IMS sessions and
associated network resources to deliver IP datagrams to B's home
address.
Depending on the policy applied to packets which do not match the
SBLP filters, the Return Routability procedure may not complete. This
is because the SBLP filters, SBLP1 and SBLP2, authorise IP datagrams
sent to B's Home Address for accessing GPRS network resources and
IMS services. The 'Care of Test' message in response to the 'Care of
Test Init' message from B uses B's Care-of Address as the
destination address.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
SBLP +----------+
Packet / \
Filter / SBLP1-Sess.1 \ MN
+--------+ +---+
| |---->--------| |
+->-| GGSN | | B |
| | |---->--------| |
CN +-------+ | +--------+ SBLP2-Sess.2+---+
+---+ | Local | +--------+ | \ /
| A |->-|Network|->-|Internet|== \GPRS Network /
+---+ | | +--------+ | +-----------+
+-------+ |
|
| /\
| +-------+ ||
+-----------| Home | ||
|Network|
+-------+
Figure 5. Route Optimization with SBLP-based Packet Filtering in GGSN
4.3 Summary
GPRS Services will be disrupted when a GPRS mobile terminal
have multiple secondary PDP Contexts to communicate with a
mobile node which changes its network attachment point and starts
using Mobile IPv6 route optimisation. This will also happen
when the GPRS mobile terminal that is having more than one GPRS
session with a mobile node leaves its home network, enters GPRS
network and starts using mobile IPv6 home agent tunnelling or
route optimisation.
IMS services will be disrupted when a mobile node that is having
an IMS session with a GPRS mobile terminal changes its network
attachment point and starts using mobile IPv6 route optimisation.
This will also happen when the GPRS mobile terminal that is having
an IMS session with a mobile node leaves its home network, enters
the GPRS/UMTS network and starts using mobile IPv6 home agent
tunnelling or route optimisation.
5. Problem generalisation
Although the description above is presented in terms of GPRS-specific
mechanisms for installing packet filters in the network. More general
situations may exist in which such filters are installed. This may
give rise to similar problems [9].
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
In the analysis above, we classify the filters as mobile terminal
defined and network service defined. This represents the source of
the information within the filters.
An example of a 'terminal defined' filter in the network is a filter
installed as a result of RSVP (or in future NSIS protocols). Such
filters determine the QoS treatment that will be applied to packets
according to the user's request and are therefore very similar to
Traffic Flow Templates.
An example of a 'network service defined ' filter would be one
installed through policy mechanisms. In this case it is in order to
apply appropriate network policy that packets filtered.
6. Security Considerations
6.1 User security considerations
No user security issues have been identified.
6.2 Network security considerations
In the case of network service defined filters (e.g. Service Based
Local Policy), the purpose of the filters is to ensure that
appropriate network policy for controlling access to network
resources and services is applied to the packets.
The problems described in this paper do not themselves represent
security issues for the network (for example users circumventing the
network's policy). Indeed, the problems arise largely because the
policies cause packets to be dropped, or treated according to a
different policy which explicitly allows those packets to pass.
However, care must be taken in considering solutions to these
problems which cause modification of the network's policies. Such
modification will necessarily be caused by the mobility event at one
or other user. These events can easily be faked by users.
For example, IP address spoofing could be used to convince the
network that a user has moved when in fact they have not.
Collaborating users could convince the network that a user has moved,
when in fact the new address belongs to a different host.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Paul Reynolds, Ric Bailey, Ronan Le
Bras, Graham Fisher, Stuart Shutt, Steve Blythe and Rob Allan for
their constant and valuable support for the work.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
References
Normative:
[1] Johnson, D., Perkins, C. and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in
IPv6", RFC3775, June 2003.
[2] 3GPP, "3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical
Specification Group Services and System Aspects; General Packet
Radio Services (GPRS); Service Description; Stage 2", 3GPP TS
23.060.
[3] 3GPP, "3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical
Specification Group Core Network; Mobile Radio Interface Layer
3 Specifications; Core Network Protocols - Stage 3", 3GPP TS
23.008.
[4] 3GPP, "3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical
Specification Group Services and System Aspects; IP Multimedia
Subsystem (IMS); Stage 2", 3GPP TS 23.228.
[5] 3GPP, "3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical
Specification Group Services and System Aspects; End-to-end
Quality of Service; Concept and Architecture", 3GPP TS 23.207.
[6] 3GPP, "3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical
Specification Group Core Network; Policy Control over Go
Interface", 3GPP TS 29.207.
[7] Bradner, S.:IETF Rights in Contributions, RFC3667, February 2004
[8] Bradner, S.: Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology,
RFC 3668, February 2004.
Informational:
[9] Le, F. et al.: draft-le-mip6-firewalls-01.txt, work in progress.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
Authors' Addresses
Xiaobao Chen
Orange PCS Ltd.
Keypoint
St. James Court, Almondsbury Park
Bradley Stoke
Bristol BS32 4QJ
UK
Phone: +44 7989 477679
Email: xiaobao.chen@orange.co.uk
Janne Rinne
Nokia
Visiokatu 3
Tampere, FIN-33720
Finland
Phone: +358 7180 40995
Email: janne.rinne@nokia.com
Juha Wiljakka
Nokia
Visiokatu 3
Tampere, FIN-33720
Finland
Phone: +358 7180 48372
Email: juha.wiljakka@nokia.com
Mark Watson
Nortel Networks
Maidenhead Office Park
Westacott Way
Maidenhead, BERKS SL6 3QH
UK
Phone: +44 1628 434456
Email: mwatson@nortelnetworks.com
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft MIPv6 and GPRS Packet Filtering July 2006
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can
be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director.
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). All Rights Reserved.
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on
an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE
REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT
THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR
ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Chen, et al. Expires July, 2006 [Page 17]