Network Working Group H. Jeon
Internet-Draft ETRI
Intended status: Standards Track M. Riegel
Expires: May 22, 2009 NSN
S. Jeong
ETRI
November 18, 2008
Transmission of IP over Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 Networks
draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802-dot-16-07.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 May 22, 2009.
Abstract
This document describes the transmission of IPv4 over Ethernet as
well as IPv6 over Ethernet in an access network deploying the IEEE
802.16 cellular radio transmission technology. The Ethernet on top
of IEEE 802.16 is realized by bridging connections which the IEEE
802.16 provides between a base station and its associated subscriber
stations. Due to the resource constraints of radio transmission
systems and the limitations of the IEEE 802.16 MAC functionality for
the realization of an Ethernet, the transmission of IP over Ethernet
over IEEE 802.16 may considerably benefit by adding IP specific
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
support functions in the Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 while maintaining
full compatibility with standard IP over Ethernet behavior.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. The IEEE 802.16 Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1. Connection Oriented Air Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.2. MAC addressing in IEEE 802.16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.3. Unidirectional Broadcast and Multicast Support . . . . . . 5
4.4. IEEE 802.16 Convergence Sublayer for IP over Ethernet . . 5
5. Ethernet Network Model for IEEE 802.16 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.1. IEEE 802.16 Ethernet Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.2. Ethernet without Native Broadcast and Multicast Support . 7
5.3. Network-side Bridging Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.4. Segmenting the Ethernet into VLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Transmission of IP over Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 Link . . . . 8
6.1. Generic IP over Ethernet Network Scenario . . . . . . . . 8
6.2. Transmission of IP over Ethernet . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2.1. IPv4 over Ethernet Packet Transmission . . . . . . . . 9
6.2.2. IPv6 over Ethernet Packet Transmission . . . . . . . . 9
6.2.3. Maximum Transmission Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2.4. Prefix Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Operational Enhancements for IP over Ethernet over IEEE
802.16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1. IP Multicast and Broadcast Packet Processing . . . . . . . 11
7.1.1. Multicast Transmission Considerations . . . . . . . . 11
7.1.2. Broadcast Transmission Considerations . . . . . . . . 11
7.2. DHCPv4 Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.3. Proxy ARP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Public Access Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Multicast CID Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . 16
Appendix B. Centralized vs. Distributed Bridging . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 20
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
1. Introduction
IEEE 802.16 [802.16] specifies a fixed to mobile broadband wireless
access system.
The IEEE 802.16 standard defines a packet CS (Convergence Sublayer)
for interfacing with specific packet-based protocols as well as a
generic packet CS (GPCS) to provide an upper-layer protocol
independent interface. This document describes transmission of IPv4
and IPv6 over Ethernet via the Ethernet specific part of the packet
CS as well as the GPCS in the IEEE 802.16 based access network.
Ethernet is a widely deployed transmission technology. It provides
unicast transport, handles broadcast and multicast traffic
efficiently, and provides rich services such as Virtual LANs.
However, Ethernet has been originally architected and designed for a
shared medium while the IEEE 802.16 uses a point-to-multipoint
architecture like other cellular radio transmission systems. Hence,
Ethernet on top of IEEE 802.16 is realized by bridging between IEEE
802.16 radio connections between a BS (Base Station) and its
associated SSs (Subscriber Stations).
Under the resource constraints of radio transmission systems and the
particularities of the IEEE 802.16 for the realization of Ethernet,
it makes sense to add IP specific support functions in the Ethernet
layer above IEEE 802.16 while maintaining full compatibility with
standard IP over Ethernet behavior.
2. Requirements
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].
3. Terminology
The terminology in this document is based on the definitions in IP
over 802.16 Problem Statement and Goals [RFC5154].
4. The IEEE 802.16 Link Model
4.1. Connection Oriented Air Interface
The IEEE 802.16 MAC establishes connections between a BS and its
associated SSs for the transfer of user data over the air. Each of
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
these connections realizes an individual Service Flow which is
identified by a 16-bit CID number and has a defined QoS profile.
Multiple connections can be established between a BS and a SS, each
with its particular QoS class and direction. Although the BS and all
the SSs are associated with unique 48-bit MAC addresses, packets
going over the air are only identified in the IEEE 802.16 MAC header
by the CID number of the particular connection. The connections are
established by MAC management messages between the BS and the SS
during network entry or also later on demand.
[Subscriber Side] [Network Side]
| | | +
| | | +
+--+--+ +--+--+ +--+-+-+--+
| MAC | | MAC | | MAC |
+-----+ +-----+ +---------+
| PHY | | PHY | | PHY |
+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+
+ + | | | | + +
+ + | +-----CID#w------+ | + +
+ + +-------CID#x--------+ + +
+ +++++++++++++++++CID#y+++++++++++++++++ +
+++++++++++++++++++CID#z+++++++++++++++++++
SS#1 SS#2 BS
Figure 1. Basic IEEE 802.16 Link Model
4.2. MAC addressing in IEEE 802.16
Each SS has a unique 48-bit MAC address and the 48-bit MAC address is
used during the initial ranging process for the identification of the
SS and may be verified by the succeeding PKM (Privacy Key Management)
authentication phase. Out of the successful authentication, the BS
establishes and maintains the list of attached SSs based on their MAC
addresses purely for MAC management purposes.
While MAC addresses are assigned to all the BSs as well as the SSs,
the forwarding of packets over the air is only based on the CID value
of the particular connection in the IEEE 802.16 MAC header. Not
relying on the MAC addresses in the payload for reception of a radio
frame allows for the transport of arbitrary source and destination
MAC addresses in Ethernet frames between a SS and its BS. This is
required for bridging Ethernet frames toward a SS which is attached
to a bridge connected to another network.
Due to the managed assignment of the service flows and associated CID
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
values to individual SSs, the BS is able to bundle all unicast
connections belonging to a particular SS into a single link on the
network side as shown in Figure 1 so that it provides a single layer
2 link between the SS and its associated wired link on the network
side.
4.3. Unidirectional Broadcast and Multicast Support
Current IEEE 802.16 [802.16] does not support bi-directional native
broadcast and multicast for IP packets. While downlink connections
can be used for multicast transmission to a group of SSs as well as
unicast transmission from the BS to a single SS, uplink connections
from the SSs to the BS provide only unicast transmission
capabilities. Furthermore, the use of multicast CIDs for realizing
downlink multicast transmissions is not necessarily preferable due to
the reduced transmission efficiency of multicast CIDs for small
multicast groups. Appendix A provides more background information
about the issues arising with multicast CIDs in IEEE 802.16 systems.
MBS (Multicast and Broadcast Service as specified in IEEE 802.16 also
does not cover IP broadcast or multicast data because MBS is
invisible to the IP layer.
4.4. IEEE 802.16 Convergence Sublayer for IP over Ethernet
IEEE 802.16 provides two solutions to transfer Ethernet frames over
IEEE 802.16 MAC connections.
The packet CS is defined for handling packet-based protocols by
classifying higher-layer packets depending on the values in the
packet header fields and assigning the packets to the related service
flow. The packet CS comprises multiple protocol specific parts to
enable the transmission of different kind of packets over IEEE
802.16. The Ethernet specific part of the packet CS supports the
transmission of Ethernet by defining classification rules based on
Ethernet header information.
The GPCS (Generic Packet Convergence Sublayer) may be used as
alternative to transfer Ethernet frames over IEEE 802.16. The GPCS
does not define classification rules for each kind of payload but
relies on higher layer functionality outside of the scope of IEEE
802.16 to provide the assignment of packets to particular service
flows.
5. Ethernet Network Model for IEEE 802.16
According to [RFC4861], a link is defined as a communication facility
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
or medium over which IP devices can communicate at the link layer,
i.e. the layer immediately below IP. Ethernet fully satisfies the
definition of the link. IEEE 802.16, however, has limitations on its
transitive connectivity, i.e. IEEE 802.16 provides point-to-point
connections between SSs and the BS but does not enable any direct SS
to SS connectivity. Hence, it is required to bridge each of the
point-to-point connections between SSs and the BS so that Ethernet is
realized over IEEE 802.16 access network.
5.1. IEEE 802.16 Ethernet Link Model
To realize Ethernet on top of IEEE 802.16 all the point-to-point
connections belonging to a SS MUST be connected to a network-side
bridging function, as shown in Figure 2. This is equivalent to
today's switched Ethernet with twisted pair wires or fibres
connecting the hosts to a bridge ("Switch").
The network-side bridging function can be realized either by a single
centralized network-side bridge or by multiple interconnected
bridges, preferable arranged in a hierarchical order. The single
centralized network-side bridge allows best control of the
broadcasting and forwarding behavior of the Ethernet over IEEE
802.16. Appendix B explains the issues of a distributed bridging
architecture, when no assumptions about the location of the access
router can be made.
The BS MUST forward all the Service Flows belonging to one SS to one
port of the network-side bridging function. No more than one SS MUST
be connected to one port of the network-side bridging function. The
separation method for multiple links on the connection between the BS
and the network-side bridging function is out of scope for this
document. Either Layer 2 transport or Layer 3 tunneling may be used.
If the Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 is extended to multiple end stations
behind the SS (i.e. SS#4 in the below figure) then the SS SHOULD
support bridging according to [802.1D] and its amendment [802.16k],
a.k.a. subscriber-side bridge, between all its subscriber side ports
and the IEEE 802.16 air link.
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
------------------------ IP Link --------------------------
[Subscriber Side] [Network Side] [Subscriber Side]
| | | | | |
ETH ETH ETH ETH ETH ETH
| | | | | |
| | +---------+---------+ | +-+---+-+
| | | Bridging Function | | |Bridge |
| | +--+-+---------+-+--+ | +---+---+
| | | + + | | |
+--+--+ +--+--+ +--+-+--+ +--+-+--+ +--+--+ +--+--+
| MAC | | MAC | | MAC | | MAC | | MAC | | MAC |
+-----+ +-----+ +-------+ +-------+ +-----+ +-----+
| PHY | | PHY | | PHY | | PHY | | PHY | | PHY |
+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+ +-+-+-+
+ | | | | + + | | | | +
+ | +--CID#u-+ | + + | +-CID#x--+ | +
+ +----CID#v---+ + + +---CID#y----+ +
+++++++++++++++CID#w++++++ ++++++CID#z+++++++++++++++
SS#1 SS#2 BS#1 BS#2 SS#3 SS#4
Figure 2. IEEE 802.16 Ethernet Link Model
5.2. Ethernet without Native Broadcast and Multicast Support
Current IEEE 802.16 does not define broadcast and multicast of
Ethernet frames. Hence Ethernet broadcast and multicast frames
SHOULD be replicated and then carried via unicast transport
connections on IEEE 802.16 access link. The network-side bridging
function performs the replication and forwarding for Ethernet
broadcast and multicast over the IEEE 802.16 radio links
5.3. Network-side Bridging Function
The network-side bridging function SHOULD create a new radio side
port whenever a new SS attaches to any of the BSs of the network or
SHOULD remove a radio side port when an associated SS detaches from
the BSs. The method for managing the port on the network-side
bridging function may depend on the protocol used for establishing
multiple links on the connection between the BS and the network-side
bridge. The port managing method is out of scope for this document.
The network-side bridging function SHALL be based on [802.1D] and its
amendment [802.16k] to interconnect the attached SSs and pass
Ethernet frames between the point-to-point connections associated
with the attached SSs. However, to enhance the IEEE 802.16 Ethernet
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
link model by avoiding broadcast or multicast packet flooding,
additional IP specific functionalities MAY be provided by the
network-side bridging function in addition to the mandatory functions
according to Section 5.1 of [802.1D].
5.4. Segmenting the Ethernet into VLAN
It is possible to restrict the size and coverage of the broadcast
domain by segmenting the Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 into VLANs and
grouping subsets of hosts into particular VLANs with each VLAN
representing an IP link. Therefore, the network-side bridging
function MAY be enabled to support VLANs according to [802.1Q] by
assigning and handling the VLAN-IDs on the virtual bridge ports.
If a SS is directly connected to a subscriber-side bridge supporting
VLANs, the port associated with such a SS MAY be enabled as trunk
port. On trunk ports, Ethernet frames are forwarded in the [802.1Q]
frame format.
6. Transmission of IP over Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 Link
6.1. Generic IP over Ethernet Network Scenario
The generic IP over Ethernet network scenario assumes that all hosts
are residing on the same link with trust relationship between all of
them. It enables the hosts to directly communicate with each other
without detouring. There can be multiple ARs on the link, which may
reside both on the subscriber side as well as on the network side as
shown in Figure 3.
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
+--+--+
---|AR|SS|
+--+--+* +----+
* +----+ +Host|
+----+--+ * | +-------+ /+----+
|Host|SS|* * * * **| BS +------+ \ / +----+
+----+--+ * | +-----+ \ \ / ++Host|
+----+--+ * +----+ \ \ +-+--------+ / +----+
|Host|SS|* \ +--+ ++
+----+ +----+--+ +---+Bridging| +----+
--+ AR ++ |Function+---+ AR +---
+----+ \ +--+ | +----+
\ +----+ / +-+--------+
+----+ +------+--+ | +---+ /
|Host+-+Bridge|SS|* * * *| BS | /
+----+ +------+--+ * | +---+
+----+/ * +----+
|Host+ +----+--+ *
+----+ |Host|SS|*
+----+--+
Figure 3. Generic IP over Ethernet Network Scenario using IEEE 802.16
6.2. Transmission of IP over Ethernet
6.2.1. IPv4 over Ethernet Packet Transmission
[RFC0894] defines the transmission of IPv4 packets over Ethernet
networks. It contains the specification of the encapsulation of the
IPv4 packets into Ethernet frames as well as rules for mapping of IP
addresses onto Ethernet MAC addresses. Hosts transmitting IPv4 over
Ethernet packets over the IEEE 802.16 MUST follow the operations
specified in [RFC0894].
6.2.1.1. Address Configuration
IPv4 addresses can be configured manually or assigned dynamically
from DHCPv4 server [RFC2131].
6.2.1.2. Address Resolution
Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) [RFC0826] MUST be used for finding
the destination Ethernet MAC address.
6.2.2. IPv6 over Ethernet Packet Transmission
[RFC2464] defines transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks
which includes an encapsulation of IPv6 packets into Ethernet frames
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
and mapping rules for IPv6 address to Ethernet address (i.e. MAC
address). Host transmitting IPv6 over Ethernet packets over the IEEE
802.16 MUST follow the operations specified in [RFC2464].
6.2.2.1. Router Discovery, Prefix Discovery and Parameter Discovery
Router Discovery, Prefix Discovery and Parameter Discovery procedures
are achieved by receiving Router Advertisement messages. However,
periodic Router Advertisement messages can waste radio resource and
disturb SSs in dormant mode in IEEE 802.16. Therefore, the
AdvDefaultLifetime and MaxRtrAdvInterval SHOULD be overridden with
high values specified in Section 8.3 in [RFC5121].
6.2.2.2. Address Configuration
When stateful address autoconfiguration is required, the stateful
address configuration according to [RFC3315] MUST be performed. In
this case, an AR supports DHCP server or relay function.
When stateless address autoconfiguration is required, the stateless
address configuration according to [RFC4862] and [RFC4861] MUST be
performed.
6.2.2.3. Address Resolution
Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) [RFC4861] MUST be used for
determining the destination Ethernet MAC address.
6.2.3. Maximum Transmission Unit
[RFC2460] mandates 1280 bytes as a minimum Maximum Transmission Unit
(MTU) size for link layer and recommends at least 1500 bytes for IPv6
over Ethernet transmission. [RFC0894] also specifies 1500 bytes as a
maximum length of IPv4 over Ethernet. Therefore, the default MTU of
IPv6 packets and IPv4 packets on Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 link MUST
be 1500 bytes.
6.2.4. Prefix Assignment
The same IPv4 prefix and the same set of IPv6 prefixes SHOULD be
assigned to all hosts attached to the Ethernet over IEEE 802.16.
Sharing the prefix means locating all hosts on the same subnetwork.
7. Operational Enhancements for IP over Ethernet over IEEE 802.16
This section presents operational enhancements in order to improve
network performance and radio resource efficiency for transmission of
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
IP packets over Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 networks.
7.1. IP Multicast and Broadcast Packet Processing
All multicast and multicast control messages SHOULD be processed in
the network-side bridging function according to [RFC4541].
Broadcasting messages to all radio-side side ports SHOULD be
prevented.
Further information on prevention of multicasting or broadcasting
messages to all radio side ports are given in the following sections.
7.1.1. Multicast Transmission Considerations
Usually, bridges replicate the IP multicast packets and forward them
into all of its available ports with the exception of the incoming
port. As a result, the IP multicast packets would be transmitted
over the air even to hosts which do not participate in the
corresponding multicast group. To allow bridges to handle IP
multicast more efficiently, the IP multicast membership should be
propagated between bridges.
In the IEEE 802.16 Ethernet link model in Section 5.1, the network-
side bridging function SHOULD process all multicast data and
multicast control messages according to [RFC4541] to maintain IP
multicast membership lists and forward IP multicast data to only
ports suitable for the multicast group.
7.1.2. Broadcast Transmission Considerations
The ordinary bridge floods the IP broadcast packets out of all
connected ports except the port on which the packet was received.
This behavior is not appropriate with scarce resources and dormant-
mode hosts in a wireless network such as an IEEE 802.16 based access
network.
The network-side bridging function in the IEEE 802.16 Ethernet link
model SHOULD flood all IP broadcast packets except ARP, DHCPv4 and
IGMP related traffic.
IGMP related broadcast packets SHOULD be forwarded according to the
[RFC4541]. ARP related broadcast SHOULD be processed as specified in
Section 7.3. DHCPv4 related broadcast packets SHOULD be handled as
specified in Section 7.2.
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
7.2. DHCPv4 Considerations
DHCPv4 clients may send DHCP DISCOVER and DHCP REQUEST messages with
the BROADCAST bit set to request the DHCP server to broadcast its
DHCP OFFER and DHCP ACK messages. The network-side bridging function
SHOULD filter these broadcast DHCP OFFER and DHCP ACK messages and
forwards the broadcast messages only to the host defined by the
client hardware address in the chaddr information element.
Alternatively, the DHCP Relay Agent Information Option (option-82)
[RFC3046] MAY be used to avoid DHCP broadcast replies. The option-82
consists of two type of sub-options; Circuit ID and Remote ID. DHCP
Relay Agent is usually located on the network-side bridging function
as Layer 2 DHCP Relay Agent, like described in [TR101]. Port number
of the network-side bridging function is possible as Circuit ID and
Remote ID may be left unspecified. Note that using option-82
requires option-82 aware DHCP servers. function SHOULD silently
discard any received self-ARP Requests.
7.3. Proxy ARP
Proxy ARP provides the function in which a device on the same link as
the hosts answers ARP Requests instead of the remote host. When
transmitting IPv4 packets over the IEEE 802.16 Ethernet link , the
Proxy ARP mechanism is used by the network-side bridging function to
avoid broadcasting ARP Requests over the air.
The network-side bridging function SHOULD maintain an ARP cache large
enough to accommodate ARP entries for all its serving SSs. The ARP
cache SHOULD be updated by any packets including ARP Requests from
SSs in the same way the normal layer-2 bridging device is updating
its Filtering Database according to [802.1D].
Upon receiving an ARP Request from a SS, the network-side bridging
function SHOULD unicast an ARP Reply back to the SS with the Ethernet
address of the target host provided that the target address matches
an entry in the ARP Cache. Otherwise, the ARP Request MAY be
flooded. The network-side bridging function SHOULD silently discard
any received self-ARP Request.
8. Public Access Recommendations
In the Public Access scenario, direct communication between nodes is
restricted because of security and accounting issues. Figure 4
depicts the public access scenario.
In the scenario, the AR is connected to a network-side bridge. The
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
AR MAY perform security filtering, policing and accounting of all
traffic from hosts, e.g. like a NAS (Network Access Server).
If the AR functions as the NAS, all the traffic from SSs SHOULD be
forwarded to the AR, not bridged at the network-side bridging
function, even in the case of traffic between SSs served by the same
AR. The bridge SHOULD forward upstream traffic from hosts toward the
AR but SHALL perform normal bridging operation for downstream traffic
from the AR and SHALL bridge SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND)
[RFC3971] messages to allow applicability of security schemes.
In IPv4 over Ethernet case, MAC-Forced Forwarding (MAC-FF) [RFC4562]
SHOULD be used for the public access network to ensure that traffic
from all hosts is always directed to the AR. The MAC-FF is performed
in the network-side bridging function, thus the bridge filters
broadcast ARP Requests from all the hosts and responds to the ARP
Requests with an Ethernet MAC address of the AR.
In IPv6 over Ethernet case, assigning unique IPv6 prefix per SS can
forces all IPv6 packets from SSs to be transferred to the AR.
However, this leads the AR to replicate multicast packets on each
virtually separated IP links to hosts joined to a corresponding
multicast group. It cannot exploit the efficient multicast support
of Ethernet link in the network side. Therefore, the AR in the
public access link model SHOULD assign common IPv6 prefixes to all
SSs served by the AR. A Prefix Information Option (PIO) [RFC4861]
carrying the common IPv6 prefixes SHOULD be advertised with On-link
flag (L-Flag) reset so that it is not assumed that the addresses
matching the prefixes are available on-link.
The AR should relay packets between SSs within the same AR.
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
+-+--+
|H|SS| +- - - - - - - - - - +
+-+--+* +----+ | +------+
+-+--+ * | +-----+ | |
|H|SS|* * * * * *| BS +-----+Bridge+-+
+-+--+ * | +-----+ | | +-----+ |
* +----+ | +------+ | | B |
+-+--+ * | +-+ r | | +-------+
|H|SS|* | i +---+AR(NAS)+--
+---+ +-+--+ | | d | | +-------+
| H ++ +-+ g |
+---+ \ +----+ | +------+ | | e | |
+---+ +--+--+ | +----+ | | +-----+
| H +--+Br|SS|* * * * | BS | | |Bridge+-+ |
+---+ +--+--+ * | +----+ |
+---+ / * +----+ | +------+ |
| H ++ +-+--+ *
+---+ |H|SS|* | Bridging Function |
+-+--+ +- - - - - - - - - - +
Figure 4. Public Access Network using IEEE 802.16
9. IANA Considerations
This document has no actions for IANA.
10. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce any new vulnerabilities to IPv4 and
IPv6 specifications or operations. The security of the IEEE 802.16
air interface between SSs and BS is the subject of [802.16] and the
security issues of Ethernet bridging are the subjects of [802.1D].
The generic IP over Ethernet network using IEEE 802.16 emulates
Ethernet link, since existing IPv4 and IPv6 security mechanisms over
Ethernet can be still used. While the public access network ensures
secure isolation of each of upstream link between hosts and AR, it
still adopts SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) [RFC3971] for securing
neighbor discovery processes and it does not introduce any new
vulnerabilities over those of Ethernet bridging.
11. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank David Johnston, Dave Thaler, Jari
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
Arkko and others for their inputs to this work.
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[802.16] P802.16Rev2D7, "Draft Standard for Local and metropolitan
area networks, Part 16: Air Interface for Fixed Broadband
Wireless Access Systems (to be updated according to the
released IEEE 802.16-2009 standard)", October 2008.
[802.16k] IEEE Std 802.16k-2007, "IEEE Standard for Local and
metropolitan area networks, Media Access Control (MAC)
Bridges, Amendment 5: Bridging of IEEE 802.16",
March 2007.
[802.1D] IEEE Std 802.1D-2004, "IEEE Standard for Local and
metropolitan area networks, Media Access Control (MAC)
Bridges", June 2004.
[802.1Q] IEEE Std 802.1Q-2005, "IEEE Standard for Local and
metropolitan area networks, Virtual Bridged Local Area
Networks", May 2005.
[RFC0826] Plummer, D., "Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol: Or
converting network protocol addresses to 48.bit Ethernet
address for transmission on Ethernet hardware", STD 37,
RFC 826, November 1982.
[RFC0894] Hornig, C., "Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams
over Ethernet networks", STD 41, RFC 894, April 1984.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",
RFC 2131, March 1997.
[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[RFC2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet
Networks", RFC 2464, December 1998.
[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.
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
September 2007.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.
[RFC5121] Patil, B., Xia, F., Sarikaya, B., Choi, JH., and S.
Madanapalli, "Transmission of IPv6 via the IPv6
Convergence Sublayer over IEEE 802.16 Networks", RFC 5121,
February 2008.
12.2. Informative References
[RFC3046] Patrick, M., "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option",
RFC 3046, January 2001.
[RFC3971] Arkko, J., Kempf, J., Zill, B., and P. Nikander, "SEcure
Neighbor Discovery (SEND)", RFC 3971, March 2005.
[RFC4541] Christensen, M., Kimball, K., and F. Solensky,
"Considerations for Internet Group Management Protocol
(IGMP) and Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) Snooping
Switches", RFC 4541, May 2006.
[RFC4562] Melsen, T. and S. Blake, "MAC-Forced Forwarding: A Method
for Subscriber Separation on an Ethernet Access Network",
RFC 4562, June 2006.
[RFC5154] Jee, J., Madanapalli, S., and J. Mandin, "IP over IEEE
802.16 Problem Statement and Goals", RFC 5154, April 2008.
[TR101] DSL Forum, "Migration to Ethernet-Based DSL Aggregation",
April 2006.
Appendix A. Multicast CID Deployment Considerations
Multicast CIDs are highly efficient means to distribute the same
information concurrently to multiple SSs under the same BS. However,
the deployment of multicast CIDs for multicast or broadcast data
services suffers from following drawbacks.
A drawback of multicast CIDs for Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 is the
unidirectional nature of multicast CIDs. While it is possible to
multicast information downstream to a number of SSs in parallel,
there are no upstream multicast connections. In upstream direction,
unicast CIDs have to be used for sending multicast messages over the
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
air to the BS requiring a special multicast forwarding function for
sending the information back to the other SSs on a multicast CID.
While similar in nature to a bridging function, there is no
appropriate forwarding model available. [802.1D] cannot take
advantage of the multicast CIDs because it relies on unicast
connections or bidirectional broadcast connections.
A further drawback of deploying multicast CIDs for distributing
broadcast control messages like ARP requests is the inability to
prevent the wake-up of dormant-mode SSs by messages not aimed for
them. Whenever a message is sent over a multicast CID, all
associated stations have to power up and receive and process the
message. While this behavior is desirable for multicast and
broadcast traffic, it is harmful for link layer broadcast control
messages aimed for a single SS, like an ARP Request. All other SSs
are wasting scarce battery power for receiving, decoding and
discarding the message. Low power consumption is an extremely
important aspect in a wireless communication.
Furthermore, it should keep in mind that multicast CIDs are only
efficient for a large number of subscribed SSs in a cell. Due to
incompatibility with advanced radio layer algorithms based on
feedback information from the receiver side, multicast connections
require much more radio resource for transferring the same
information as unicast connections.
Appendix B. Centralized vs. Distributed Bridging
This specification introduces a network-side bridging function, which
can be realized either by a centralized device or by multiple
interconnected bridges in a distributed manner. One common
implementation of the distributed model is the scenario where a
bridge is directly attached to the BS, such that the interface
between BS and bridging function is becoming a software interface
within the operation system of the BS/Bridge device.
The operational enhancements described in Section 7 of this document
are based on the availability of additional information about all the
hosts attached to the Ethernet. Flooding all ports of the bridge can
be avoided when a-priori information is available to determine the
port to which an Ethernet frame has to be delivered.
Best performance can be reached by a centralized database containing
all information about the hosts attached to the Ethernet. A
centralized database can be established either by a centralized
bridge device or by a hierarchical bridging structure with dedicated
uplink and downlink ports like in the public access case, where the
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
uppermost bridge is able to retrieve and maintain all the
information.
As the generic case of the IP over Ethernet over IEEE 802.16 link
model does not make any assumption of the location of the AR (an AR
may eventually be attached to a SS), a centralized bridging system is
recommended for the generic case. In the centralized system, every
connection over the air of a link should be attached to a single
centralized bridge. The support functions of Multicast/Broadcast
bridging according to Section 7.1, handling of DHCP broadcasts
according to Section 7.2, proxy ARP function according to Section 7.3
and MAC-Forced Forwarding according to Section 8 are implemented in
the centralized bridge.
A distributed bridging model is in particular appropriate for the
public access mode, where Ethernet frames, which do not have entries
in the bridge behind the BS, are send upstream to a bridge finally
having an entry for the destination MAC address.
Authors' Addresses
Hongseok Jeon
Electronics Telecommunications Research Institute
161 Gajeong-dong, Yuseong-gu
Daejeon, 305-350
KOREA
Phone: +82-42-860-3892
Email: hongseok.jeon@gmail.com
Max Riegel
Nokia Siemens Networks
St-Martin-Str 76
Munich, 81541
Germany
Phone: +49-89-636-75194
Email: maximilian.riegel@nsn.com
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
Sangjin Jeong
Electronics Telecommunications Research Institute
161 Gajeong-dong, Yuseong-gu
Daejeon, 305-350
KOREA
Phone: +82-42-860-1877
Email: sjjeong@gmail.com
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft IPoEth over IEEE 802.16 November 2008
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
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, THE IETF TRUST 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.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights 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; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat 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 on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Jeon, et al. Expires May 22, 2009 [Page 20]
