





Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                      F. Brockners
Request for Comments: 6674                                 S. Gundavelli
Category: Standards Track                                          Cisco
ISSN: 2070-1721                                              S. Speicher
                                                     Deutsche Telekom AG
                                                                 D. Ward
                                                                   Cisco
                                                               July 2012


              Gateway-Initiated Dual-Stack Lite Deployment

Abstract

   Gateway-Initiated Dual-Stack Lite (GI-DS-Lite) is a variant of Dual-
   Stack Lite (DS-Lite) applicable to certain tunnel-based access
   architectures.  GI-DS-Lite extends existing access tunnels beyond the
   access gateway to an IPv4-IPv4 NAT using softwires with an embedded
   Context Identifier that uniquely identifies the end-system to which
   the tunneled packets belong.  The access gateway determines which
   portion of the traffic requires NAT using local policies and sends/
   receives this portion to/from this softwire.

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6674.















Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


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
   (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.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Protocol and Related Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   5.  Softwire Management and Related Considerations . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  Softwire Embodiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   7.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   8.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   9.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     9.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     9.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   Appendix A.  GI-DS-Lite Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     A.1.  Connectivity Establishment: Example Call Flow  . . . . . . 13
     A.2.  GI-DS-Lite Applicability: Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . 14




















Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


1.  Overview

   Gateway-Initiated Dual-Stack Lite (GI-DS-Lite) is a variant of Dual-
   Stack Lite (DS-Lite) [RFC6333], applicable to network architectures
   that use point-to-point tunnels between the access device and the
   access gateway.  The access gateway in these models is designed to
   serve large numbers of access devices.  Mobile architectures based on
   Mobile IPv6 [RFC6275], Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213], or GPRS
   Tunnelling Protocol (GTP) [TS29060], as well as broadband
   architectures based on PPP or point-to-point VLANs as defined by the
   Broadband Forum [TR59][TR101], are examples of this type of
   architecture.

   The DS-Lite approach leverages IPv4-in-IPv6 tunnels (or other
   tunneling modes) for carrying the IPv4 traffic from the customer
   network to the Address Family Transition Router (AFTR).  An
   established softwire between the AFTR and the access device is used
   for traffic-forwarding purposes.  This makes the inner IPv4 address
   irrelevant for traffic routing and allows sharing private IPv4
   addresses [RFC1918] between customer sites within the service
   provider network.

   Similarly to DS-Lite, GI-DS-Lite enables the service provider to
   share public IPv4 addresses among different customers by combining
   tunneling and NAT.  It allows multiple access devices behind the
   access gateway to share the same private IPv4 address [RFC1918].
   Rather than initiating the tunnel right on the access device,
   GI-DS-Lite logically extends the already existing access tunnels
   beyond the access gateway towards the AFTR using a tunneling
   mechanism with semantics for carrying context state related to the
   encapsulated traffic.  This approach results in supporting
   overlapping IPv4 addresses in the access network, requiring no
   changes to either the access device or the access architecture.
   Additional tunneling overhead in the access network is also omitted.
   If, for example, an encapsulation mechanism based on Generic Routing
   Encapsulation (GRE) is chosen, it allows the network between the
   access gateway and the AFTR to be either IPv4 or IPv6 and allows the
   operator to migrate to IPv6 in incremental steps.

2.  Conventions

   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].







Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


   The following abbreviations are used within this document:

      AFTR: Address Family Transition Router.  An AFTR combines IP-in-IP
      tunnel termination and IPv4-IPv4 NAT.

      AD: Access Device.  It is the end host, also known as the mobile
      node in mobile architectures.

      AG: Access Gateway.  A gateway in the access network, such as LMA,
      Home Agent (HA), GGSN, or PDN-GW in mobile architectures.

      CID: Context Identifier

      DS-Lite: Dual-Stack Lite

      GGSN: Gateway GPRS Support Node

      GI-DS-Lite: Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite

      NAT: Network Address Translator

      PDN-GW: Packet Data Network Gateway

      SW: Softwire [RFC4925]

      SWID: Softwire Identifier

3.  Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite

   This section provides an overview of Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite
   (GI-DS-Lite).  Figure 1 outlines the generic deployment scenario for
   GI-DS-Lite.  This generic scenario can be mapped to multiple
   different access architectures, some of which are described in
   Appendix A.

   In Figure 1, access devices (AD-1 and AD-2) are connected to the
   access gateway using some form of tunnel technology and the same is
   used for carrying IPv4 (and optionally IPv6) traffic of the access
   device.  These access devices may also be connected to the access
   gateway over point-to-point links.  The details on how the network
   delivers the IPv4 address configuration to the access devices are
   specific to the access architecture and are outside the scope of this
   document.  With GI-DS-Lite, the access gateway and AFTR are connected
   by a softwire [RFC4925].  The softwire is identified by a softwire
   identifier (SWID).  The SWID does not need to be globally unique,
   i.e., different SWIDs could be used to identify a softwire at the
   different ends of a softwire.  The form of the SWID depends on the
   tunneling technology used for the softwire.  The SWID could, for



Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


   example, be the endpoints of a GRE tunnel or a VPN-ID.  See Section 6
   for details.  A Context Identifier (CID) is used to multiplex flows
   associated with the individual access devices onto the softwire.  It
   is deployment dependent whether the flows from a particular AD are
   identified using the source IP address or an access tunnel
   identifier.  Local policies at the access gateway determine which
   part of the traffic received from an access device is tunneled over
   the softwire to the AFTR.  The combination of CID and SWID must be
   unique between the access gateway and AFTR to identify the flows
   associated with an AD.  The CID is typically a 32-bit-wide identifier
   and is assigned by the access gateway.  It is retrieved either from a
   local or remote (e.g., Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting
   (AAA)) repository.  Like the SWID, the embodiment of the CID depends
   on the tunnel mode used and the type of the network connecting the
   access gateway and AFTR.  If, for example, GRE [RFC2784] with GRE Key
   and Sequence Number extensions [RFC2890] is used as the softwire
   technology, the network connecting the access gateway and AFTR could
   be a IPv4-only, IPv6-only, or dual-stack IP network.  The CID would
   be carried within the GRE Key field.  Section 6 details the different
   softwire types supported with GI-DS-Lite.

                        Access Device: AD-1
                        Context ID: CID-1
                                             NAT Mappings:
      IPv4: a.b.c.d            +---+         (CID-1, TCP port1 <->
      +------+  access tunnel  |   |                 e.f.g.h, TCP port2)
      | AD-1 |=================|   |                          +---+
      +------+                 |   |                          | A |
                               |   |    Softwire SWID-1       | F |
                               | A |==========================| T |
      IPv4: a.b.c.d            | G |  (e.g., IPv4-over-GRE    | R |
      +------+                 |   |   over IPv4 or IPv6)     +---+
      | AD-2 |=================|   |
      +------+  access tunnel  |   |         (CID-2, TCP port3 <->
                               |   |                 e.f.g.h, TCP port4)
                               +---+

                        Access Device: AD-2
                        Context ID: CID-2

    Figure 1: Gateway-Initiated Dual-Stack Lite Reference Architecture

   The AFTR combines softwire termination and IPv4-IPv4 NAT.  The NAT
   binding of the AD's address could be assigned autonomously by the
   AFTR from a local address pool, configured on a per-binding basis
   (either by a remote control entity through a NAT control protocol or
   through manual configuration), or derived from the CID (e.g., the
   CID, if 32 bits wide, could be mapped 1:1 to an external IPv4



Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


   address).  A simple example of a translation table at the AFTR is
   shown in Figure 2.  The choice of the appropriate translation scheme
   for a traffic flow can take into account parameters such as
   destination IP address, incoming interface, etc.  The IP address of
   the AFTR, which will either be an IPv6 or an IPv4 address depending
   on the transport network between the access gateway and the AFTR, is
   configured on the access gateway.  A variety of methods, such as out-
   of-band mechanisms or manual configuration, apply.

       +=====================================+======================+
       |  Softwire-ID/Context-ID/IPv4/Port   |  Public IPv4/Port    |
       +=====================================+======================+
       |  SWID-1/CID-1/a.b.c.d/TCP-port1     |  e.f.g.h/TCP-port2   |
       |                                     |                      |
       |  SWID-1/CID-2/a.b.c.d/TCP-port3     |  e.f.g.h/TCP-port4   |
       +-------------------------------------+----------------------+

              Figure 2: Example Translation Table at the AFTR

   GI-DS-Lite does not require a 1:1 relationship between an access
   gateway and AFTR, but more generally applies to (M:N) scenarios,
   where M access gateways are connected to N AFTRs.  Multiple access
   gateways could be served by a single AFTR.  AFTRs could be dedicated
   to specific groups of access-devices, groups of access gateways, or
   geographic regions.  An AFTR could be, but does not have to be, co-
   located with an access gateway.

4.  Protocol and Related Considerations

   o  Depending on the embodiment of the CID (e.g., for GRE
      encapsulation with GRE Key), the NAT binding entry maintained at
      the AFTR, which reflects an active flow between an access device
      inside the network and a node in the Internet, SHOULD be extended
      to include the CID and the identifier of the softwire (SWID).

   o  When creating an IPv4-to-IPv4 NAT binding for an IPv4 packet flow
      received from the access gateway over the softwire, the AFTR
      SHOULD associate the CID with that NAT binding.  It SHOULD use the
      combination of CID and SWID as the unique identifier and use those
      parameters in the NAT binding entry.

   o  When forwarding a packet to the access device, the AFTR SHOULD
      obtain the CID from the NAT binding associated with that flow.
      For example, in case of GRE encapsulation, it SHOULD add the CID
      to the GRE Key and Sequence Number extension of the GRE header and
      tunnel it to the access gateway.





Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


   o  On receiving any packet from the softwire, the AFTR SHOULD obtain
      the CID from the incoming packet and use it for performing NAT
      binding lookup and packet translation before forwarding the
      packet.

   o  The access gateway, on receiving any IPv4 packet from the access
      device, SHOULD lookup the CID for that access device.  In case of
      GRE encapsulation, it can, for example, add the CID to the GRE Key
      and Sequence Number extension of the GRE header and tunnel it to
      the AFTR.

   o  On receiving any packet from the softwire, the access gateway
      SHOULD obtain the CID from the packet and use it for making the
      forwarding decision.

   o  When encapsulating an IPv4 packet, the access gateway and AFTR
      SHOULD use its Diffserv Codepoint (DSCP) to derive the DSCP (or
      MPLS Traffic-Class Field in the case of MPLS) of the softwire.

5.  Softwire Management and Related Considerations

   The following are the considerations related to the operational
   management of the softwire between the AFTR and access gateway.

   o  The softwire between the access gateway and the AFTR MAY be
      created at system startup time OR dynamically established on-
      demand.  It is deployment dependent which Operations,
      Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) mechanisms (such as ICMP,
      Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC5880], or Label
      Switched Path (LSP) ping [RFC4379]) are employed by the access
      gateway and AFTR for softwire health management and corresponding
      protection strategies.

   o  The softwire peers MAY be provisioned to perform policy
      enforcement, such as for determining the protocol type or overall
      portion of traffic that gets tunneled or for any other settings
      related to quality of service.  The specific details on how this
      is achieved or the types of policies that can be applied are
      outside the scope for this document.

   o  The softwire peers SHOULD use the correct path MTU value for the
      tunnel path between the access gateway and the AFTR.  This value
      MAY be statically configured at softwire creation time or
      dynamically discovered using the standard path MTU discovery
      techniques.






Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


   o  An access gateway and an AFTR can have multiple softwires
      established between them (e.g., to separate address domains,
      provide for load-sharing, etc.).

6.  Softwire Embodiments

   Which tunnel technologies can be applied for the softwire connecting
   an access gateway and AFTR are dependent on the deployment and the
   requirements.  GRE encapsulation with GRE Key extension, MPLS VPNs
   [RFC4364], or plain IP-in-IP encapsulation can be used.  Softwire
   identification and CID depend on the tunneling technology employed:

   o  GRE with GRE Key: SWID is the tunnel identifier of the GRE tunnel
      between the access gateway and the AFTR.  The CID is the GRE Key
      associated with the AD.

   o  MPLS VPN: The SWID is a generic identifier that uniquely
      identifies the VPN at either the access gateway or AFTR.
      Depending on whether the access gateway or AFTR is acting as
      customer edge (CE) or provider edge (PE), the SWID could, for
      example, be an attachment circuit identifier, an identifier
      representing the set of VPN route labels pointing to the routes
      within the VPN, etc.  The AD's IPv4 address is the CID.  For a
      given VPN, the AD's IPv4 address must be unique.

   o  IPv4/IPv6-in-MPLS: The SWID is the top MPLS label.  CID might be
      the next MPLS label in the stack, if present, or the IP address of
      the AD.

   o  IPv4-in-IPv4: SWID is the outer IPv4 source address.  The AD's
      IPv4 address is the CID.  For a given outer IPv4 source address,
      the AD's IPv4 address must be unique.

   o  IPv4-in-IPv6: SWID is the outer IPv6 source address.  If the AD's
      IPv4 address is used as CID, the AD's IPv4 address must be unique.
      If the IPv6 Flow Label [RFC6437] is used as CID, the IPv4
      addresses of the ADs may overlap.  Given that the IPv6 Flow Label
      is 20 bits wide, which is shorter than the recommended 32-bit CID,
      large-scale deployments may require additional scaling
      considerations.  In addition, one should ensure sufficient
      randomization of the IP Flow Label to avoid possible interference
      with other uses of the IP Flow Label, such as Equal Cost Multipath
      (ECMP) support.








Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


   Figure 3 gives an overview of the different tunnel modes as they
   apply to different deployment scenarios. "x" indicates that a certain
   deployment scenario is supported.  The following abbreviations are
   used:

   o  IPv4 address

      *  "up": Deployments with "unique private IPv4 addresses" assigned
         to the access devices are supported.

      *  "op": Deployments with "overlapping private IPv4 addresses"
         assigned to the access devices are supported.

      *  "s": Deployments where all access devices are assigned the same
         IPv4 address are supported.

   o  Network-type

      *  "v4": The access gateway and AFTR are connected by an IPv4-only
         network.

      *  "v6": The access gateway and AFTR are connected by an IPv6-only
         network.

      *  "v4v6": The access gateway and AFTR are connected by a dual-
         stack network, supporting IPv4 and IPv6.

      *  "MPLS": The access gateway and AFTR are connected by an MPLS
         network

        +===================+==============+=======================+
        |                    | IPv4 address|      Network-type     |
        |    Softwire        +----+----+---+----+----+------+------+
        |                    | up | op | s | v4 | v6 | v4v6 | MPLS |
        +====================+====+====+===+====+====+======+======+
        | GRE with GRE Key   |  x |  x | x |  x |  x |   x  |      |
        | MPLS VPN           |  x |  x |   |    |    |      |   x  |
        | IPv4/IPv6-in-MPLS  |  x |  x | x |    |    |      |   x  |
        | IPv4-in-IPv4       |  x |    |   |  x |    |      |      |
        | IPv4-in-IPv6       |  x |    |   |    |  x |      |      |
        | IPv4-in-IPv6 w/ FL |  x |  x | x |    |  x |      |      |
        +====================+====+====+===+====+====+======+======+

              Figure 3: Tunnel Modes and Their Applicability







Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


7.  Security Considerations

   The approach specified in this document allows the use of Dual-Stack
   Lite for tunnel-based access architectures.  Rather than initiating
   the tunnel from the access device, GI-DS-Lite logically extends the
   already existing access tunnel beyond the access gateway towards the
   AFTR and builds a virtual softwire between the AFTR and the access
   device.  This approach requires the use of an additional Context
   Identifier in the AFTR and at the access gateway, which is required
   for making IP packet-forwarding decisions.

   If a packet is received with an incorrect Context Identifier at the
   access gateway/AFTR, it will be associated with an incorrect access
   device.  Therefore, care must be taken to ensure an IP packet
   tunneled between the access gateway and the AFTR is carried with the
   Context Identifier of the access device associated with that IP
   packet.  The Context Identifier is not carried from the access
   device, and it is not possible for one access device to claim the
   Context Identifier of some other access device.  However, it is
   possible that an on-path attacker between the access gateway and the
   AFTR can potentially modify the Context Identifier in the packet,
   resulting in association of the packet to an incorrect access device.
   This threat is no different from an on-path attacker modifying the
   source/destination address of an IP packet.  However, this threat can
   be prevented by enabling IPsec security with integrity protection
   turned on, between the access gateway and the AFTR, that will ensure
   the correct binding of the Context Identifier and the inner packet.
   This specification does not require any new security considerations
   other than those specified in the Dual-Stack Lite specification
   [RFC6333] and in the security considerations specified for the given
   access architecture, such as Proxy Mobile IPv6, leveraging this
   transitioning scheme.

8.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to acknowledge the discussions on this topic
   with Mark Grayson, Jay Iyer, Kent Leung, Vojislav Vucetic, Flemming
   Andreasen, Dan Wing, Jouni Korhonen, Teemu Savolainen, Parviz Yegani,
   Farooq Bari, Mohamed Boucadair, Vinod Pandey, Jari Arkko, Eric Voit,
   Yiu L. Lee, Tina Tsou, Guo-Liang Yang, Cathy Zhou, Olaf Bonness, Paco
   Cortes, Jim Guichard, Stephen Farrell, Pete Resnik, and Ralph Droms.










Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC1918]  Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
              E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
              BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.

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

   [RFC2784]  Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P.
              Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784,
              March 2000.

   [RFC2890]  Dommety, G., "Key and Sequence Number Extensions to GRE",
              RFC 2890, September 2000.

   [RFC4364]  Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
              Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, February 2006.

   [RFC4379]  Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
              Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
              February 2006.

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

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

   [RFC5844]  Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
              Mobile IPv6", RFC 5844, May 2010.

   [RFC5880]  Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
              (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010.

   [RFC6275]  Perkins, C., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.

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

   [RFC6437]  Amante, S., Carpenter, B., Jiang, S., and J. Rajahalme,
              "IPv6 Flow Label Specification", RFC 6437, November 2011.





Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 11]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


9.2.  Informative References

   [NAT-CONTROL]
              Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Singh, V., and V. Fajardo,
              "Diameter Network Address and Port Translation Control
              Application", Work in Progress, April 2012.

   [RFC4925]  Li, X., Dawkins, S., Ward, D., and A. Durand, "Softwire
              Problem Statement", RFC 4925, July 2007.

   [TR101]    Broadband Forum, "TR-101: Migration to Ethernet-Based DSL
              Aggregation", April 2006.

   [TR59]     Broadband Forum, "TR-059: DSL Evolution - Architecture
              Requirements for the Support of QoS-Enabled IP Services",
              September 2003.

   [TS23060]  3GPP, "Technical Specification Group Services and System
              Aspects; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service
              description; Stage 2, V11.2.0", TS 23.060, 2012.

   [TS23401]  3GPP, "Technical Specification Group Services and System
              Aspects; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements
              for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network
              (E-UTRAN) access, V11.1.0", TS 23.401, 2012.

   [TS29060]  3GPP, "Technical Specification Group Core Network and
              Terminals; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS
              Tunnelling Protocol (GTP), V11.3.0", TS 29.060, 2012.






















Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 12]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


Appendix A.  GI-DS-Lite Deployment

A.1.  Connectivity Establishment: Example Call Flow

   Figure 4 shows an example call flow - linking access tunnel
   establishment on the access gateway with the softwire to the AFTR.
   This simple example assumes that traffic from the AD uses a single
   access tunnel and that the access gateway will use local policies to
   decide which portion of the traffic received over this access tunnel
   needs to be forwarded to the AFTR.

             AD         Access Gateway       AAA/Policy     AFTR
             |                |                 |            |
             |----(1)-------->|                 |            |
             |               (2)<-------------->|            |
             |               (3)                |            |
             |                |<------(4)------------------->|
             |               (5)                |            |
             |<---(6)-------->|                 |            |
             |                |                 |            |

           Figure 4: Example Call Flow for Session Establishment

   1.  The access gateway receives a request to create an access tunnel
       endpoint.

   2.  The access gateway authenticates and authorizes the access
       tunnel.  Based on local policy or through interaction with the
       AAA/Policy system, the access gateway recognizes that IPv4
       service should be provided using GI-DS-Lite.

   3.  The access gateway creates an access tunnel endpoint.  The access
       tunnel links AD and access gateway.

   4.  (Optional): The access gateway and the AFTR establish a control
       session between themselves.  This session can, for example, be
       used to exchange accounting or NAT-configuration information.
       Accounting information could be supplied to the access gateway,
       AAA/Policy, or other network entities that require information
       about the externally visible address/port pairs of a particular
       access device.  The Diameter NAT Control Application
       [NAT-CONTROL] could, for example, be used for this purpose.

   5.  The access gateway allocates a unique CID and associates those
       flows received from the access tunnel that need to be tunneled
       towards the AFTR with the softwire linking the access gateway and
       AFTR.  Local forwarding policy on the access gateway determines
       which traffic will need to be tunneled towards the AFTR.



Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 13]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


   6.  The access gateway and AD complete the access tunnel
       establishment.  Depending on the procedures and mechanisms of the
       corresponding access network architecture, this step can include
       the assignment of an IPv4 address to the AD.

A.2.  GI-DS-Lite Applicability: Examples

   The section outlines deployment examples of the generic GI-DS-Lite
   architecture described in Section 3.

   o  Access architectures based on Mobile-IP: In a network scenario
      based on Dual-Stack Mobile IPv6 (DSMIPv6) [RFC5555], the Mobile
      IPv6 home agent will implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway
      function along with the dual-stack Mobile IPv6 functionality.

   o  Access architectures based on Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6): In a
      PMIPv6 [RFC5213] scenario, the local mobility anchor (LMA) will
      implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function along with the
      PMIPv6 IPv4 support [RFC5844] functionality.

   o  GTP-based access architectures: Third Generation Partnership
      Project (3GPP) TS 23.401 [TS23401] and 3GPP TS 23.060 [TS23060]
      define mobile access architectures using GTP.  For GI-DS-Lite, the
      PDN-GW or GGSN will also assume the access gateway function.

   o  Fixed Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX)
      architecture: If GI-DS-Lite is applied to fixed WiMAX, the Access
      Service Network Gateway (ASN-GW) will implement the GI-DS-Lite
      access gateway function.

   o  Mobile WiMAX: If GI-DS-Lite is applied to mobile WiMAX, the home
      agent will implement the access gateway function.

   o  PPP-based broadband access architectures: If GI-DS-Lite is applied
      to PPP-based access architectures, the Broadband Remote Access
      Server (BRAS) or Broadband Network Gateway (BNG) will implement
      the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function.

   o  In broadband access architectures using per-subscriber VLANs, the
      BNG will implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function.











Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 14]

RFC 6674                Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite              July 2012


Authors' Addresses

   Frank Brockners
   Cisco
   Hansaallee 249, 3rd Floor
   Duesseldorf, Nordrhein-Westfalen  40549
   Germany

   EMail: fbrockne@cisco.com


   Sri Gundavelli
   Cisco
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   EMail: sgundave@cisco.com


   Sebastian Speicher
   Deutsche Telekom AG
   Landgrabenweg 151
   Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen  53277
   Germany

   EMail: sebastian.speicher@telekom.de


   David Ward
   Cisco
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134
   USA

   EMail: wardd@cisco.com















Brockners, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 15]

