[Search] [txt|xml|pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]
Versions: 00 01                                                         
Network Working Group                                          I. Farrer
Internet-Draft                                       Deutsche Telekom AG
Intended status: Informational                                 A. Durand
Expires: February 1, 2013                               Juniper Networks
                                                           July 31, 2012


                  lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture
           draft-farrer-softwire-lw4o6-deterministic-arch-00

Abstract

   This memo provides an operational deterministic architecture for the
   deployment of Lightweight 4over6
   [I-D.cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite] offering scalability and
   high-availability whilst preserving the per-flow stateless nature of
   the solution.

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 [RFC2119].

Status of this Memo

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

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

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

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 1, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 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



Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft     lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture         July 2012


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


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Deterministic Architecture  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
     2.1.  Distribution of the Subscriber Population . . . . . . . . . 3
     2.2.  AFTR Cluster  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     2.3.  IPv4 Address Plus Ports to IPv6 Binding Table
           Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     2.4.  IPv6 and IPv4 Anycast Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . 5
     2.5.  Load Balancing across Multiple Concentrators  . . . . . . . 6
     2.6.  DHCPv6 Tunnel End-point Option Considerations . . . . . . . 6
     2.7.  CPE IPv6 Address Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
     2.8.  Binding Table Synchronization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
     2.9.  Subscriber Management and Growth  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     2.10. Privacy Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   3.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8




















Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft     lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture         July 2012


1.  Introduction

   DS-Lite [RFC6333] is a solution to deal with the IPv4 exhaustion
   problem once an IPv6 access network is deployed.  It enables
   unmodified IPv4 applications to access the IPv4 Internet over the
   IPv6 access network.  In the DS-Lite architecture, global IPv4
   addresses are shared amongst subscribers as the concentrator (AFTR)
   performs a Carrier-Grade NAT (CGN) function.

   [I-D.cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite] extends the original DS-Lite
   model so that NAT is performed by the CPE and IPv4 address sharing is
   possible through the use of source port-restrictions.

   This memo provides an operational architecture for the deployment of
   Lightweight 4over6 [I-D.cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite] offering
   scalability and high-availability whilst preserving the per-flow
   stateless nature of the solution.

   The approach presented here is stateless and deterministic.  It
   leverages the stateless properties of Lightweight 4over6 to offer a
   completely deterministic solution.  The bindings between IPv4
   addresses, ports and IPv6 addresses are pre-computed and stored
   identically in the AFTRs and DHCP servers.  This allows for a very
   simple fail-over mechanism within a cluster of identically
   provisioned AFTRs.


2.  Deterministic Architecture

2.1.  Distribution of the Subscriber Population

   In a large deployment, it makes sense to distribute the subscriber
   population into subscriber groups, managed by a single AFTR, or by
   many AFTRs grouped in a cluster.  Topological considerations and
   geographical proximity may also be factors in the grouping of
   subscribers.  The exact size of those groups depend on the capacity
   characteristics of the AFTRs and is out of scope for this memo.

   Each subscriber group is assigned an IPv6 anycast address and a pool
   of IPv4 addresses which are common to all AFTRs in a cluster.  The
   IPv4 pool must be sized to handle the subscriber population.  No
   constraints are placed upon the addresses that are used for this
   pool, in that they can be taken from a single, contiguous block,
   multiple non-contiguous blocks or single IPv4 addresses as required
   by the operator.

   The exact ratio subscribers to IPv4 addresses, (e.g. the average
   number of ports assigned per subscriber) is out of scope for this



Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft     lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture         July 2012


   memo.

2.2.  AFTR Cluster

   All AFTRs within a cluster are configured with identical lW4o6
   parameters.  In particular, they are configured with the same:

   o  IPv6 AFTR tunnel end-point address

   o  IPv4 public pool

   o  IPv6 address to IPv4 address and port binding table

2.3.  IPv4 Address Plus Ports to IPv6 Binding Table Considerations

   The DHCPv4 over IPv6 server will provide each IPv6 CPE an IPv4
   address and port range to use within its local NAT binding table.
   The DHCPv4 server uses the IPv6 address of the CPE as its identifier.
   As such, the DHCPv4 server contains a table for assigning a specific
   IPv4 address and ports based on the IPv6 address of the requesting
   CPE.  To maintain the stateless nature of the architecture, DHCPv4
   reservation based address assignment is recommended.  The lease time
   for the IPv4 address is unimportant, although a long lease time (or
   even infinity) is recommended to reduce the number of DHCPv4
   requests.

   A similar table (containing the same address/port binding
   information) is also present on all AFTRs in the cluster.

   The following table shows sample CPE configuration data for a
   subscriber group.  In order for the system to function coherently,
   this data needs to be kept synchronised between all of the functional
   elements (AFTRs and DHCPv4o6 servers) serving the subscriber group.

             +--------------+------------+----------+
             | IPv6 address |IPv4 address|port-range|
             +--------------+------------+----------+
             |2001:db8::1   |   1.2.3.4  | 1000-1999|
             |2001:0:1::2   |   1.2.3.4  | 2000-2999|
             |2001:0:5::1   |   2.3.4.5  | 1500-3999|
             +--------------+------------+----------+


   Figure 1 DHCP4o6/AFTR Per-subscriber configuration table data example

   This memo proposes a simple architecture to guarantee the
   synchronization of those mapping tables and rely on anycast IPv4 and
   IPv6 technologies to provide failover within the AFTRs in the same



Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft     lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture         July 2012


   cluster.

2.4.  IPv6 and IPv4 Anycast Considerations

   The following diagram shows the architecture for the Lightweight
   4over6 cluster deployment.


                                              ^
                                              |  To public Internet
             Public IPv4 Address              |  (IPv4)
             pool advertised into             |
             upstream routing                 |
             by all AFTRs             +-------+-------+
             in cluster               |               |
                                      |   Upstream    |
                +- - - - - - - - - - >| IPv4 Anycast  |
                |                     +--+----+----+--+
                                         |    |    |
                |                        |    |    |
                   +---------------------+    |    +---------------------+
                |  |                          |                          |
           +----+--+-------+          +-------+ ------+          +-------+-------+
           |               |          |               |          |               |
           |    LW4o6      |          |    LW4o6      |          |    LW4o6      |
           |    AFTR1      |          |    AFTR2      |  . . . . |    AFTRn      |
           |               |          |               |          |               |
           +----+--+-------+          +-------+-------+          +-------+-------+
                |  |                          |                          |
                   +---------------------+    |    +---------------------+
                |                        |    |    |
                                         |    |    |
                |                     +--+----+----+--+
                +- - - - - - - - - - >|               |
                                      |  Downstream   |
            IPv6 tunnel end-point     | IPv6 Anycast  |
            Anycast Address           +-------+-------+
            advertized into                   |
            downstream routing                |
            by all AFTRS                      | To Initiator
            in cluster                        | Access network
                                              | (IPv6 only)
                                              v

   Figure 2 Lightweight 4over6 Cluster

   To increase service availability, A simple way to achieve fail-over
   is to configure both the IPv6 tunnel end point address and the IPv4



Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft     lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture         July 2012


   address pool as anycast addresses on the AFTRs and announce these
   routes into the IGP run by the ISP, such as OSPF or IS-IS.

   The number of AFTRs in a cluster provides the degree of redundancy of
   the solution.  In practice, two AFTRs are expected to be sufficient
   in most cases.

2.5.  Load Balancing across Multiple Concentrators

   AFTR functionality can be scaled by load balancing the encapsulation/
   decapsulation across multiple AFTRs in a cluster.  Due to the
   commonality of configuration and stateless nature of the solution,
   any tunneled packet from any Initiator served by the cluster can
   arrive at any cluster member and will be processed in the same way.
   Likewise, for inbound packets originating in the IPv4 realm, a packet
   that arrives at any of the cluster member will be encapsulated and
   sent to the correct initiator.

   Load balancing could be achieved using specific load balancing
   infrastructure to distribute the tunnels and inbound v4 traffic
   across the cluster.  It is also possible to use the Equal Cost
   Multipath inherent in some routing protocols to achieve this.

   In order to prevent out-of-sequence packets in the tunnelled traffic,
   a mechanism for forwarding all packets belonging to a single tunnel
   through the same cluster member should be used.  An example of this
   would be a source/destination hashing algorithm such as [RFC2992]
   describes.

2.6.  DHCPv6 Tunnel End-point Option Considerations

   All CPEs belonging to the same group of subscribers need to receive
   the same tunnel end-point option (via DHCPv6).  This will be set to
   the IPv6 anycast address of the AFTR cluster.

2.7.  CPE IPv6 Address Management

   The DHCPv4 server uses the IPv6 address of the CPE as its index.  In
   order to keep the overall service architecture flexible and
   adaptable, it is preferable that the CPE is configured using DHCPv6
   out of a specific pool reserved by the ISP.

2.8.  Binding Table Synchronization

   It is proposed that binding tables be pre-computed and stored
   statically on the AFTRs and the DHCPv4 servers.  The method of
   creating the binding tables is out of the scope of this memo.




Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft     lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture         July 2012


   These tables are not expected to change regularly.  Typical reasons
   for an update include adding or removing an IPv4 address block, or
   changing the size of IPv4 ports ranges available to each CPE.

   To ensure continuous operation, binding tables have to be updated
   simultaneously across all AFTRs in a cluster by a mechanism such as
   netconf.  It may also be necessary to reconfigure CPEs during this
   process (e.g. via a DHCPv6 reconifgure message).  The details are out
   of scope for this memo.

2.9.  Subscriber Management and Growth

   It is recommended that the ISP predefines all IPv6 addresses and
   corresponding IPv4 addresses and port ranges for any given subscriber
   group.

   If the ISP runs out of space within a subscriber group, another group
   is then defined.  Cutomer CPEs can be migrated between different
   subscriber groups by alterning the CPE configuration over DHCP.

2.10.  Privacy Extensions

   In some deployments, regulations require that IP addresses allocated
   to customers can be changed periodically or on demand to protect
   users privacy.

   This can be achieve by rolling over the IPv6 addresses in the DHCPv6
   server allocating IPv6 addresses to the CPE.  If all subscribers
   within the subscriber group are allocated the same number of ports in
   IPv4, then the IPv6 to IPv4 address and port binding may remain the
   same, the IPv4 address and ports will then roll over automatically at
   the same time as the IPv6 addresses do.

   [I-D.cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite] states that when the IPv6
   address of the B4 is changed, then DHCPv4over6 configuration process
   must be re-initiated.


3.  IANA Considerations

   None.


4.  Security Considerations

   None.





Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft     lw4over6 Deterministic Architecture         July 2012


5.  Acknowledgements


6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2992]  Hopps, C., "Analysis of an Equal-Cost Multi-Path
              Algorithm", RFC 2992, November 2000.

   [RFC6333]  Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
              Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4
              Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011.

6.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite]
              Cui, Y., Sun, Q., Boucadair, M., Tsou, T., Lee, Y., and I.
              Farrer, "Lightweight 4over6: An Extension to the DS-Lite
              Architecture", draft-cui-softwire-b4-translated-ds-lite-07
              (work in progress), July 2012.


Authors' Addresses

   Ian Farrer
   Deutsche Telekom AG
   GTN-FM4
   Landgrabenweg 151
   Bonn  53227
   Germany

   Email: ian.farrer@telekom.de


   Alain Durand
   Juniper Networks
   1194 North Mathilda Avenue
   Sunnyvale, CA  94089-1206
   USA

   Email: adurand@juniper.net






Farrer & Durand         Expires February 1, 2013                [Page 8]