[Search] [txt|pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]
Versions: 00                                                            
Network Working Group                                        B. Sarikaya
Internet-Draft                                                    F. Xia
Expires: April 15, 2010                                       Huawei USA
                                                            M. Boucadair
                                                          France Telecom
                                                        October 12, 2009


                       A+P for Proxy Mobile IPv6
                   draft-sarikaya-aplusp-pmip-00.txt

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and 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 April 15, 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
   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.







Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


Abstract

   This memo specifies how to use IPv6 a+p technique in mobile networks
   for Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6).  Mobile node which is a dual-stack
   node can receive a shared IPv4 Home Address together with a port
   range from the Local Mobility Agent (LMA).  LMA is co-located with
   Port Range Router (PRR).  Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) encapsulates
   IPv4 datagrams in IPv6 which are decapsulated at the LMA.  In the
   binding mode, LMA as PRR receives incoming IPv4 datagrams, determines
   the routing identifier, finds the binding cache entry for this MN and
   then encapsulates the IPv4 datagram in an IPv6 one and forwards the
   encapsulated datagram to MN.  The stateless mode is also described.
   Mobile network could be WiMAX network or 3GPP Long Term Evolution
   (LTE) network.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.1.  Overall Context  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.2.  Contribution of This Memo  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Basic Port-Range-based PMIPv6 Solution . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.1.  Overall Procedure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.2.  IPv4 Data Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  IPv6 Port-Range-based Mobile IPv6 Solution: stateless mode . .  8
   5.  Extensions to Proxy Mobile IPv6  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     5.1.  Proxy Binding Update Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     5.2.  Proxy Binding Acknowledgement Extensions . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   8.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   9.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     9.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     9.2.  Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14















Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


1.  Introduction

1.1.  Overall Context

   It is commonly agreed that IPv4 address depletion is a fact.  Several
   solutions have been proposed to cope with this sensitive issue.  All
   these solutions are based on IP address sharing and differ in where
   the IP address sharing function is enforced.

   The first category is denoted as Port Range
   [I-D.boucadair-port-range] or A+P solutions [I-D.ymbk-aplusp].  The
   spirit of this category is to assign the same public IP address to
   several customers' devices together with a Port Range.
   Communications issued/destined to a port-restricted device can be
   established only if the ports belong to the provisioned Port Range.

   The second category is known as CGN (for Carrier Grade NAT).  Two
   main CGN variants can be distinguished.  Double NAT, in which two
   levels of NAT are cascaded: one in the CPE and one in the network
   (i.e.  CGN) and DS-lite [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite] which
   gets rid of the CPE NAT level.  DS-lite requires a Dual-Stack CPE.
   Thus, a given CPE is assigned with an IPv6 prefix to be used for its
   native IPv6 communications and also to encapsulate the IPv4 packets
   into IPv6 ones between the CPE and the DS-lite CGN.

   The main advantage of the a+p solutions compared to the CGN-based
   ones is to avoid maintaining any session-state in the service
   provider's realm.  Hurdles related to the deployment of NAT technique
   in the service domain and constraints to maintain various ALGs are
   avoided.  For more information about the advantage of a+p, the reader
   should refer to [I-D.ymbk-aplusp] and/or [I-D.boucadair-port-range].
   When deployed in the context of mobile networks, the same IPv4
   address can be shared by many mobile nodes but the number of source
   ports they can use are limited.  In the binding mode, Port Range
   Router in the network keeps a binding table containing the routing
   identifier (IPv6 address), IPv4 address and port mask.  Port Range
   Router receives all incoming datagrams for the shared IPv4 addresses
   and searches the binding table to retrieve the routing identifier and
   forwards the IPv4 datagram to the correct host.  In the stateless
   mode, this binding cache is not required.

1.2.  Contribution of This Memo

   This document presents a mobility port-range solution combining the
   port range for Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6, [RFC5213]).  For Proxy
   Mobile IPv6, we use the router-based architecture of DS-lite.  In
   this case MAG is the softwire initiator and it encapsulates IPv4
   datagrams in IPv6 and sends them to the port range router which is



Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


   co-located with the local mobility anchor.  Port range router
   functionality replaces DS-Lite Carrier Grade NAT (CGN).  Inbound
   datagrams are received by the Port Range Router whose binding table
   is integrated with the binding cache of LMA.  LMA then searches its
   binding cache and finds IPv6 care-of address and then encapsulates
   the datagram and sends it to the MAG which decapsulates it and sends
   it to MN.

   Proxy Mobile IPv6 defines other scenarios as well in
   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support].  Scenarios such as MAG behind a
   NAT which requires NAT traversal mechanisms.  Using port range and
   DS-lite router-based architecture, the need for these more
   complicated operations is eliminated.

   Proxy Mobile IPv6 is defined to provide network-based mobility
   support without any mobility signaling from the mobile nodes.  Proxy
   Mobile IPv6 is expected to work on unmodified hosts.  The solution
   proposed below in Section 3 however requires mobile nodes to be able
   to request port range IPv4 addresses.  Mobile node modification is
   inherent in this solution.


2.  Terminology

   This document uses the terminology defined in
   [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite], [I-D.boucadair-port-range] and
   [I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign], [RFC5213] and
   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support].


3.  Basic Port-Range-based PMIPv6 Solution

   This section assumes that the basic Port-Range architecture as
   defined in [I-D.boucadair-port-range] is adopted.  Particularly, a
   binding entry is required to associate an IPv4 address + Port Range
   with an IPv6 address (or IPv6 prefix).  Section 4 describes an
   alternative in which this binding is not required.

3.1.  Overall Procedure

   IPv4-enabled dual-stack MN can get an IPv4 Home Address.  The
   simplest scenario is as follows: to register MN with LMA, MAG sends
   an IPv6 Binding Update to LMA.  MAG MUST include IPv4 Home Address
   option defined in [RFC5555] extended with port range value and mask
   in the Proxy Binding Update (PBU) and set the address to 0.0.0.0.
   LMA assigns an IPv4 Home Address and port range and returns it in a
   Proxy Binding Acknowledgement (PBA) using an extended IPv4 Home
   Address option called IPv4 Home Address and Port Range (HoA-PR)



Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


   defined in Section 5.  MN sends IPv4 datagrams to MAG. then, MAG
   tunnels (IPv4-in-IPv6) datagrams to LMA.

   We will describe two more scenarios for IPv4 home address
   configuration.


     MN   MAG(DHCP-S)  LMA
    |------>|        |    1. DHCPDISCOVER(OPTION-IPv4-PRA)
    |       |------->|    2. Proxy Binding Update
    |       |<-------|    3. Proxy Binding Acknowledgement (IPv4 HoA-PR)
    |       |========|    4. Tunnel/Route Setup
    |<------|        |    5. DHCPOFFER  (OPTION-IPv4-PRA)
    |------>|        |    6. DHCPREQUEST (OPTION-IPv4-PRA)
    |<------|        |    7. DHCPACK


           Figure 1: Mobile Node IPv4 Address Configuration - 1

   Figure 1 illustrates the overall flow exchange to retrieve a shared
   IPv4 address.  Concretely, the experienced behaviour is as follows:

   1.  MN enters the network.  MN sends DHCPDISCOVER message to DHCP
       Proxy/Server [I-D.ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support].  The message
       will contain OPTION-IPv4-PRA option with the sub-opt type
       indicating port mask (value = 1) [I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign].
   2.  MAG registers this MN by sending a Proxy Binding Update message
       to LMA.  MAG adds IPv4 Home Address Option with port range value
       and range and sets IPv4 Home Address field in the option to
       0.0.0.0.
   3.  LMA assigns a shared IPv4 Home Address and a port range address
       for this MN.  LMA sends Proxy Binding Acknowledgement with IPv4
       Address Acknowledgement and Port Range option.  If MN is dual-
       stack, LMA assigns Home Network Prefix(es) for MN and includes
       them in the PBA.  LMA creates a binding in its binding cache for
       IPv4 HoA (and MN HNP if MN is dual-stack).  In the binding cache,
       together with IPv4 HoA, the port range and port mask MUST also be
       included.  LMA acting as Port Range Router also assigns MAG's
       IPv6 address (Proxy-CoA) (in the source address of PBU) as the
       binding identifier for MN.  HA adds an entry containing (IPv4
       HoA, port mask, port range, Proxy-CoA) to the binding table for
       this MN [I-D.boucadair-port-range].
   4.  A tunnel is established between MAG and LMA.  This is DS-Lite
       tunnel between IPv6 address of the interface of MAG towards LMA
       and IPv6 address of the interface of LMA towards MAG.
   5.  MN receives DHCP OFFER message with the 'yiaddr' (client IP
       address) field set to 0.0.0.0 and with OPTION-IPv4-PRA option
       with the sub-opt type indicating port mask (value = 1).  The



Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


       option contains the shared IPv4 address and port range and mask.
       DHCP Proxy/Server MUST assign the IPv4 address and port range
       received in Step 3 to the MN.
   6.  MN sends DHCP REQUEST message.  MN MUST NOT include a 'Requested
       IP Address' DHCP option (code 50) into this DHCPREQUEST and also
       MUST NOT insert the IP address received in OPTION-IPv4-PRA into
       the 'Requested IP Address' DHCP option (code 50).
   7.  MN receives DHCP ACK message with OPTION-IPv4-PRA.  MN uses this
       address as its IPv4 address.


   MN   MAG(DHCP-R) LMA   DHCP-S
   |       |------->|      | 1. Proxy Binding Update
   |       |<-------|      | 2. Proxy Binding Acknowledgement (IPv4 HoA-PR)
   |       |========|      | 3. Tunnel/Route Setup
   |------>|-------------->| 4. DHCPDISCOVER (OPTION-IPv4-PRA) via DHCP-R
   |<------|<--------------| 5. DHCPOFFER (OPTION-IPv4-PRA) via DHCP-R
   |------>|-------------->| 6. DHCPREQUEST (OPTION-IPv4-PRA) via DHCP-R
   |<------|<--------------| 7. DHCPACK  via DHCP-R



           Figure 2: Mobile Node IPv4 Address Configuration - 2

   The mobile node address configuration in Figure 2 has the following
   steps:

   1.  MN enters the network.  MAG registers this MN by sending a Proxy
       Binding Update message to LMA.  MAG adds IPv4 Home Address Option
       with port range value and range and sets IPv4 Home Address field
       in the option to 0.0.0.0.
   2.  LMA assigns a shared IPv4 Home Address and a port range address
       for this MN.  LMA sends Proxy Binding Acknowledgement with IPv4
       Address Acknowledgement and Port Range Option.  If MN is dual-
       stack, LMA assigns Home Network Prefix(es) for MN and includes
       them in the PBA.  LMA creates a binding in its binding cache for
       IPv4 HoA (and MN HNP if MN is dual-stack).  In the binding cache,
       together with IPv4 HoA, the port range and port mask MUST also be
       included.  LMA acting as Port Range Router also assigns MAG's
       IPv6 address (Proxy-CoA) (in the source address of PBU) as the
       binding identifier for MN.  HA adds an entry containing (IPv4
       HoA, port mask, port range, Proxy-CoA) to the binding table for
       this MN [I-D.boucadair-port-range].
   3.  A tunnel is established between MAG and LMA.  This is DS-Lite
       tunnel between IPv6 address of the interface of MAG towards LMA
       and IPv6 address of the interface of LMA towards MAG.





Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


   4.  MN sends DHCPDISCOVER message to DHCP Relay Agent
       [I-D.ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support].  The message will contain
       OPTION-IPv4-PRA Option with the sub-opt type indicating port mask
       (value = 1) [I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign].  DHCPv4 Relay sends this
       message to DHCP server.
   5.  MN receives DHCP OFFER message with the 'yiaddr' (client IP
       address) field set to 0.0.0.0 and with OPTION-IPv4-PRA Option
       with the sub-opt type indicating port mask (value = 1).  The
       option contains the shared IPv4 address and port range and mask.
       DHCP Server MUST assign the IPv4 address and port range received
       in Step 2 to the MN.
   6.  MN sends DHCP REQUEST message.  MN MUST NOT include a 'Requested
       IP Address' DHCP option (code 50) into this DHCPREQUEST and also
       MUST NOT insert the IP address received in OPTION-IPv4-PRA into
       the 'Requested IP Address' DHCP option (code 50).
   7.  MN receives DHCP ACK message with OPTION-IPv4-PRA.  MN uses this
       address as its IPv4 address.

   MN sends IPv4 datagrams to MAG.  LMA tunnels these datagrams are
   tunneled to LMA using IPv4-in-IPv6 encapsulation scheme.  Internal
   IPv4 packet's source address is IPv4 HoA.  Internal IPv4 packet's
   source port MUST be within range defined by the port range and mask
   sent by LMA.

   MN handoffs and gets connected to a different network.  MN sends DHCP
   RENEW message to DHCP Proxy/Server or Relay Agent which is colocated
   with the new MAG.  The new MAG sends a PBU to LMA to register this
   move.  DHCP RENEW MUST include IPv4 Home Address and Port Range
   Options.  LMA modifies the binding cache with the new Proxy-CoA for
   this MN.  LMA MUST modify the binding table by changing the binding
   identifier for this IPv4 address and port range.

3.2.  IPv4 Data Flow

   Port Range Router collocated in LMA has to receive the incoming IPv4
   datagrams for all MNs that are assigned a shared IPv4 address.  This
   can be achieved in IGP by advertizing all port shared IPv4 addresses.

   When Port Range Router receives an IPv4 datagram it searches the
   binding table for destination IPv4 address and port for a matching
   entry against IPv4 HoA, port mask and port range.  If an entry is
   found then the binding identifier (Proxy-CoA) is determined.  Next
   LMA searches the binding cache for IPv4 HoA and port range to verify
   that there is a binding cache entry for this MN.  HA tunnels the
   received IPv4 datagram to the MAG at the destination address of
   Proxy-CoA.

   When MN has IPv4 data to send MN always sends the datagram in IPv4 to



Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


   the MAG it is currently connected.  MAG encapsulates IPv4 datagrams
   in IPv6 and sends them to LMA in the MAG-LMA tunnel.  LMA
   decapsulates the datagram.  LMA MUST verify the source address and
   source port in the inner header using the tunnel header's source
   address to find the corresponding binding cache entry.


4.  IPv6 Port-Range-based Mobile IPv6 Solution: stateless mode

   If the network is configured as DS-lite network
   [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite] the following two implications
   should be taken into account:

   In the scenario in Figure 2, it is not possible for DHCPv4 Relay
   Agent to communicate with DHCPv4 Server in IPv4.  Mobile Access
   Gateway (collocated with DHCPv4 Relay) has to encapsulate DHCPv4
   messages in IPv6 before sending them to DHCPv4 Server.
   Alternatively, DHCPv6 can be used to provision the shared IPv4
   address and the Port Range as defined in
   [I-D.boucadair-dhcpv6-shared-address-option].

   IPv4-enabled mobile nodes make DNS requests in IPv4.  For that
   purpose they need to be configured with the address of an IPv4 DNS
   resolver.  The DNS resolver then forwards the DNS request from the
   mobile nodes over IPv6 to the IPv6 DNS resolver address it has
   received over DHCPv6.  DNS resolver for IPv4 must be a DNS proxy as
   described in [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite].

   When a stateless mode is adopted, MNs are assigned with an IPv6
   prefix which enclose the shared IPv4 address and the significant bits
   of the Port Range.

   For outgoing communications, the same behaviour as described in
   Section 3.2 applies.

   For incoming communications, the PRR does not need to maintain any
   binding table to map the shared IPv4 address, port range and an IPv6
   address.  The PRR builds an IPv6 address using the destination IPv4
   address and source number.  The PRR MUST be configured with the
   Pref6.  The IPv4 datagram is then encapsulated in an IPv6 one and
   sent to the aforementioned IPv6 address.  The encapsulated datagram
   is received by the MN which proceeds to a de-capsulation operation.
   Encapsulated IPv4 datagram is then treated according to normal
   behaviour.

   This mode is completely stateless (except for the mobility management
   aspects), i.e. no binding table is needed.




Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


5.  Extensions to Proxy Mobile IPv6

5.1.  Proxy Binding Update Extensions

   IPv4 Home Address Option defined in [RFC5555] is extended to also
   carry the port range value and mask and this new option is called
   IPv4 Home Address and Port Range Option.

   This option is included in the mobility header, including the proxy
   binding update message sent from the mobile access gateway to the
   local mobility anchor.


        0                   1                   2                   3
        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |      Type     |   Length      |Prefix-len |P|    Reserved     |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                     IPv4 Home Address                         |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |     Port Range Value          |       Port Range Mask         |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


             Figure 3: IPv4 Home Address and Port Range Option

   Type

      TBA1 for Type
   Length

      10
   Prefix-len

      As defined in [RFC5555]
   P

      As defined in [RFC5555]
   Reserved

      As defined in [RFC5555]
   IPv4 home address

      As defined in [RFC5555].  Mobile access gateway MUST set this
      field to 0.0.0.0.






Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


   Port Range Value

      16-bit field that indicates the value of the mask to be applied.
      Mobile access gateway must set this field to all zeros.
   Port Range Mask

      16-bit field that indicates the position of the bits which are
      used to build the mask.  Mobile access gateway must set this field
      to all zeros.

5.2.  Proxy Binding Acknowledgement Extensions

   IPv4 Home Address Acknowledgement option defined in [RFC5555] is
   extended to also carry the port range value and mask and this new
   option is called IPv4 Home Address and Port Range Acknowledgement
   Option.


        0                   1                   2                   3
        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |      Type     |   Length      |  Status       |Prefix-len |Res|
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                     IPv4 Home Address                         |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |     Port Range Value          |       Port Range Mask         |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


     Figure 4: IPv4 Home Address and Port Range Acknowledgement Option

   Type

      TBA2 for Type
   Length

      10
   Prefix-len

      As defined in [RFC5555]
   Res

      As defined in [RFC5555]
   IPv4 home address

      As defined in [RFC5555].  Local mobility anchor sets this field to
      the value that it will use in the binding cache entry.  This
      address is a public address.



Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


   Port Range Value

      16-bit field that indicates the value of the mask to be applied.
      Local mobility anchor must set this field to a valid port range
      value.
   Port Range Mask

      16-bit field that indicates the position of the bits which are
      used to build the mask.  Local mobility anchor must set this field
      to a valid port range mask.
   Status

      The following values are allocated in addition to the ones defined
      in [RFC5555].
   o  140 Dynamic IPv4 home address assignment with port range feature
   not available
   o  141 No address/port left


6.  Security Considerations

   TBD.


7.  IANA Considerations

   TBD.


8.  Acknowledgements

   TBD.


9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

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

   [RFC2629]  Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
              June 1999.

   [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite]
              Durand, A., Droms, R., Haberman, B., Woodyatt, J., Lee,
              Y., and R. Bush, "Dual-stack lite broadband deployments
              post IPv4 exhaustion",



Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


              draft-ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite-01 (work in progress),
              July 2009.

   [I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign]
              Bajko, G., Savolainen, T., Boucadair, M., and P. Levis,
              "Port Restricted IP Address Assignment",
              draft-bajko-pripaddrassign-01 (work in progress),
              March 2009.

   [I-D.boucadair-dhcpv6-shared-address-option]
              Boucadair, M., Levis, P., Grimault, J., Savolainen, T.,
              and G. Bajko, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
              (DHCPv6) Options for Shared IP Addresses  Solutions",
              draft-boucadair-dhcpv6-shared-address-option-00 (work in
              progress), May 2009.

   [I-D.boucadair-port-range]
              Boucadair, M., Levis, P., Bajko, G., and T. Savolainen,
              "IPv4 Connectivity Access in the Context of IPv4 Address
              Exhaustion: Port  Range based IP Architecture",
              draft-boucadair-port-range-02 (work in progress),
              July 2009.

   [I-D.ymbk-aplusp]
              Bush, R., "The A+P Approach to the IPv4 Address Shortage",
              draft-ymbk-aplusp-04 (work in progress), July 2009.

   [I-D.boucadair-behave-ipv6-portrange]
              Boucadair, M., Levis, P., Grimault, J., Villefranque, A.,
              Kassi-Lahlou, M., Bajko, G., Lee, Y., and T. Melia,
              "Flexible IPv6 Migration Scenarios in the Context of IPv4
              Address Shortage",
              draft-boucadair-behave-ipv6-portrange-03 (work in
              progress), October 2009.

   [RFC5555]  Soliman, H., "Mobile IPv6 Support for Dual Stack Hosts and
              Routers", RFC 5555, June 2009.

   [RFC5213]  Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
              and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.

   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support]
              Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
              Mobile IPv6", draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support-17
              (work in progress), September 2009.

   [RFC3775]  Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.



Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


9.2.  Informative references

   [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.

   [I-D.ietf-netlmm-grekey-option]
              Muhanna, A., Khalil, M., Gundavelli, S., and K. Leung,
              "GRE Key Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6",
              draft-ietf-netlmm-grekey-option-09 (work in progress),
              May 2009.

   [I-D.ietf-mip6-hiopt]
              Jang, H., Yegin, A., Chowdhury, K., and J. Choi, "DHCP
              Options for Home Information Discovery in MIPv6",
              draft-ietf-mip6-hiopt-17 (work in progress), May 2008.

   [3GPP23402]
              "3GPP TS  23.402. Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP
              accesses.", June 2009.

   [3GPP29275]
              "3GPP TS  29.275. Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) based
              Mobility and Tunnelling protocols; Stage 3",
              September 2009.

   [WiMAXnwg]
              "WiMAX Forum Networking Working Group Stage 3
              Specification Release 1.5.", March 2009.





















Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft               A+P for PMIPv6                 October 2009


Authors' Addresses

   Behcet Sarikaya
   Huawei USA
   1700 Alma Dr. Suite 500
   Plano, TX  75075

   Phone: +1 972-509-5599
   Email: sarikaya@ieee.org


   Frank Xia
   Huawei USA
   1700 Alma Dr. Suite 500
   Plano, TX  75075

   Phone: +1 972-509-5599
   Email: xiayangsong@huawei.com


   Mohamed Boucadair
   France Telecom
   3, Av Francois Chateau
   Rennes, France  35000

   Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange-ftgroup.com

























Sarikaya, et al.         Expires April 15, 2010                [Page 14]