draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-18.txt   draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-19.txt 
V6OPS Working Group D. Binet V6OPS Working Group D. Binet
Internet-Draft M. Boucadair Internet-Draft M. Boucadair
Intended status: Informational France Telecom Intended status: Informational France Telecom
Expires: August 22, 2015 A. Vizdal Expires: August 27, 2015 A. Vizdal
Deutsche Telekom AG Deutsche Telekom AG
G. Chen G. Chen
China Mobile China Mobile
N. Heatley N. Heatley
EE EE
R. Chandler R. Chandler
eircom | meteor eircom | meteor
D. Michaud D. Michaud
Rogers Communications Rogers Communications
D. Lopez D. Lopez
Telefonica I+D Telefonica I+D
February 18, 2015 February 23, 2015
An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices
draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-18 draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-19
Abstract Abstract
This document defines a profile that is a superset of that of the This document defines a profile that is a superset of that of the
connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in the IPv6 for Third connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in the IPv6 for Third
Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Cellular Hosts document. This Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Cellular Hosts document. This
document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators recommend document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators recommend
in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or dual-stack in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or dual-stack
wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network) with a special wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network) with a special
focus on IPv4 service continuity features. focus on IPv4 service continuity features.
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 22, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 27, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 28 skipping to change at page 2, line 28
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Connectivity Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. Connectivity Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Recommendations for Cellular Devices with LAN Capabilities . 9 3. Recommendations for Cellular Devices with LAN Capabilities . 9
4. Advanced Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4. Advanced Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
IPv6 deployment in 3GPP mobile networks is the only perennial IPv6 deployment in 3GPP mobile networks is the only perennial
solution to the exhaustion of IPv4 addresses in those networks. solution to the exhaustion of IPv4 addresses in those networks.
Several mobile operators have already deployed IPv6 [RFC2460] or are Several mobile operators have already deployed IPv6 [RFC2460] or are
in the pre-deployment phase. One of the major hurdles as perceived in the pre-deployment phase. One of the major hurdles as perceived
by some mobile operators is the availability of non-broken IPv6 by some mobile operators is the availability of non-broken IPv6
implementation in mobile devices (e.g., Section 3.3 of [OECD]). implementation in mobile devices (e.g., Section 3.3 of [OECD]).
skipping to change at page 3, line 36 skipping to change at page 3, line 36
The recommendations do not include 3GPP release details. For more The recommendations do not include 3GPP release details. For more
information on the 3GPP releases detail, the reader may refer to information on the 3GPP releases detail, the reader may refer to
Section 6.2 of [RFC6459]. Section 6.2 of [RFC6459].
Some of the features listed in this profile document require to Some of the features listed in this profile document require to
activate dedicated functions at the network side. It is out of scope activate dedicated functions at the network side. It is out of scope
of this document to list these network-side functions. of this document to list these network-side functions.
A detailed overview of IPv6 support in 3GPP architectures is provided A detailed overview of IPv6 support in 3GPP architectures is provided
in [RFC6459]. in [RFC6459]. IPv6-only considerations in mobile networks are
further discussed in [RFC6342].
This document is organized as follows: This document is organized as follows:
o Section 2 lists generic recommendations including functionalities o Section 2 lists generic recommendations including functionalities
to provide IPv4 service continuity over an IPv6-only connectivity. to provide IPv4 service continuity over an IPv6-only connectivity.
o Section 3 enumerates a set of recommendations for cellular devices o Section 3 enumerates a set of recommendations for cellular devices
with LAN capabilities (e.g., CPE, dongles with tethering with LAN capabilities (e.g., CPE, dongles with tethering
features). features).
o Section 4 identifies a set of advanced recommendations to fulfill o Section 4 identifies a set of advanced recommendations to fulfill
requirements of critical services such as VoLTE (Voice over LTE). requirements of critical services such as VoLTE (Voice over LTE).
1.1. Terminology 1.1. Terminology
This document makes use of the terms defined in [RFC6459]. In This document makes use of the terms defined in [RFC6459]. In
addition, the following terms are used: addition, the following terms are used:
o "3GPP cellular host" (or cellular host for short) denotes a 3GPP o "3GPP cellular host" (or cellular host for short) denotes a 3GPP
device which can be connected to 3GPP mobile networks or IEEE device which can be connected to 3GPP mobile networks.
802.11 networks.
o "3GPP cellular device" (or cellular device for short) refers to a o "3GPP cellular device" (or cellular device for short) refers to a
cellular host which supports the capability to share its WAN (Wide cellular host which supports the capability to share its WAN (Wide
Area Network) connectivity. Area Network) connectivity.
o "IPv4 service continuity" denotes the features used to provide o "IPv4 service continuity" denotes the features used to provide
access to IPv4-only services to customers serviced with an access to IPv4-only services to customers serviced with an
IPv6-only connectivity. A typical example of IPv4 service IPv6-only connectivity. A typical example of IPv4 service
continuity technique is NAT64 [RFC6146]. continuity technique is NAT64 [RFC6146].
skipping to change at page 4, line 49 skipping to change at page 4, line 48
sections covering specific functionalities for devices providing some sections covering specific functionalities for devices providing some
LAN functions (e.g., mobile CPE or broadband dongles). LAN functions (e.g., mobile CPE or broadband dongles).
The recommendations listed below are valid for both 3GPP GPRS and The recommendations listed below are valid for both 3GPP GPRS and
3GPP EPS (Evolved Packet System) access. For EPS, PDN-Connection 3GPP EPS (Evolved Packet System) access. For EPS, PDN-Connection
term is used instead of PDP-Context. Other non-3GPP accesses term is used instead of PDP-Context. Other non-3GPP accesses
[TS.23402] are out of scope of this document. [TS.23402] are out of scope of this document.
This profile is a superset of that of the IPv6 profile for 3GPP This profile is a superset of that of the IPv6 profile for 3GPP
Cellular Hosts [RFC7066], which is in turn a superset of IPv6 Node Cellular Hosts [RFC7066], which is in turn a superset of IPv6 Node
Requirements [RFC6434]. It targets cellular nodes, including GPRS, Requirements [RFC6434]. It targets cellular nodes, including GPRS
EPC (Evolved Packet Core) and IEEE 802.11 networks, that require and EPC (Evolved Packet Core), that require features to ensure IPv4
features to ensure IPv4 service delivery over an IPv6-only transport service delivery over an IPv6-only transport in addition to the base
in addition to the base IPv6 service. Moreover, this profile covers IPv6 service. Moreover, this profile covers cellular CPEs that are
cellular CPEs that are used in various deployments to offer fixed- used in various deployments to offer fixed-like services.
like services. Recommendations inspired from real deployment
experiences (e.g., roaming) are included in this profile. Also, this Recommendations inspired from real deployment experiences (e.g.,
profile sketches recommendations for the sake of deterministic roaming) are included in this profile. Also, this profile sketches
behaviors of cellular devices when the same configuration information recommendations for the sake of deterministic behaviors of cellular
is received over several channels. devices when the same configuration information is received over
several channels.
For conflicting recommendations in [RFC7066] and [RFC6434] (e.g., For conflicting recommendations in [RFC7066] and [RFC6434] (e.g.,
Neighbor Discovery Protocol), this profile adheres to [RFC7066]. Neighbor Discovery Protocol), this profile adheres to [RFC7066].
Indeed, the support of Neighbor Discovery Protocol is mandatory in Indeed, the support of Neighbor Discovery Protocol is mandatory in
3GPP cellular environment as it is the only way to convey IPv6 prefix 3GPP cellular environment as it is the only way to convey IPv6 prefix
towards the 3GPP cellular device. In particular, MTU (Maximum towards the 3GPP cellular device. In particular, MTU (Maximum
Transmission Unit) communication via Router Advertisement must be Transmission Unit) communication via Router Advertisement must be
supported since many 3GPP networks do not have a standard MTU supported since many 3GPP networks do not have a standard MTU
setting. setting.
This profile uses a stronger language for the support of Prefix This profile uses a stronger language for the support of Prefix
Delegation compared to [RFC7066]. The main motivation is that Delegation compared to [RFC7066]. The main motivation is that
cellular networks are more and more perceived as an alternative to cellular networks are more and more perceived as an alternative to
fixed networks for home IP-based services delivery; especially with fixed networks for home IP-based services delivery; especially with
the advent of smartphones and 3GPP data dongles. There is a need for the advent of smartphones and 3GPP data dongles. There is a need for
an efficient mechanism to assign shorter prefix than /64 to cellular an efficient mechanism to assign larger prefixes to cellular hosts so
hosts so that each LAN segment can get its own /64 prefix and multi- that each LAN segment can get its own /64 prefix and multi-link
link subnet issues to be avoided. The support of this functionality subnet issues to be avoided. The support of this functionality in
in both cellular and fixed networks is key for fixed-mobile both cellular and fixed networks is key for fixed-mobile convergence.
convergence.
The use of address family dependent APIs (Application Programming The use of address family dependent APIs (Application Programming
Interfaces) or hard-coded IPv4 address literals may lead to broken Interfaces) or hard-coded IPv4 address literals may lead to broken
applications when IPv6 connectivity is in use. As such, means to applications when IPv6 connectivity is in use. As such, means to
minimize broken applications when the cellular host is attached to an minimize broken applications when the cellular host is attached to an
IPv6-only network should be encouraged. Particularly, (1) name IPv6-only network should be encouraged. Particularly, (1) name
resolution libraries (e.g., [RFC3596]) must support both IPv4 and resolution libraries (e.g., [RFC3596]) must support both IPv4 and
IPv6; (2) applications must be independent of the underlying IP IPv6; (2) applications must be independent of the underlying IP
address family; (3) and applications relying upon Uniform Resource address family; (3) and applications relying upon Uniform Resource
Identifiers (URIs) must follow [RFC3986] and its updates. Note, some Identifiers (URIs) must follow [RFC3986] and its updates. Note, some
skipping to change at page 6, line 20 skipping to change at page 6, line 19
This section identifies the main connectivity recommendations to be This section identifies the main connectivity recommendations to be
followed by a cellular host to attach to a network using IPv6 in followed by a cellular host to attach to a network using IPv6 in
addition to what is defined in [RFC6434] and [RFC7066]. Both dual- addition to what is defined in [RFC6434] and [RFC7066]. Both dual-
stack and IPv6-only deployment models are considered. IPv4 service stack and IPv6-only deployment models are considered. IPv4 service
continuity features are listed in this section because these are continuity features are listed in this section because these are
critical for Operators with an IPv6-only deployment model. critical for Operators with an IPv6-only deployment model.
C_REC#1: In order to allow each operator to select their own C_REC#1: In order to allow each operator to select their own
strategy regarding IPv6 introduction, the cellular host strategy regarding IPv6 introduction, the cellular host
must support both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP-Contexts [TS.23060]. must support both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP-Contexts [TS.23060].
IPv4, IPv6 or IPv4v6 PDP-Context request acceptance depends IPv4, IPv6 or IPv4v6 PDP-Context request acceptance depends
on the cellular network configuration. on the cellular network configuration.
C_REC#2: The cellular host must comply with the behavior defined in C_REC#2: The cellular host must comply with the behavior defined in
[TS.23060] [TS.23401] [TS.24008] for requesting a PDP- [TS.23060] [TS.23401] [TS.24008] for requesting a PDP-
Context type. In particular, the cellular host must Context type.
request by default an IPv6 PDP-Context if the cellular host
is IPv6-only and request an IPv4v6 PDP-Context if the In particular, the cellular host must request by default an
cellular host is dual-stack or when the cellular host is IPv6 PDP-Context if the cellular host is IPv6-only and
not aware of connectivity types requested by devices request an IPv4v6 PDP-Context if the cellular host is dual-
connected to it (e.g., cellular host with LAN capabilities stack or when the cellular host is not aware of
as discussed in Section 3): connectivity types requested by devices connected to it
(e.g., cellular host with LAN capabilities as discussed in
Section 3):
* If the requested IPv4v6 PDP-Context is not supported by * If the requested IPv4v6 PDP-Context is not supported by
the network, but IPv4 and IPv6 PDP types are allowed, the network, but IPv4 and IPv6 PDP types are allowed,
then the cellular host will be configured with an IPv4 then the cellular host will be configured with an IPv4
address or an IPv6 prefix by the network. It must address or an IPv6 prefix by the network. It must
initiate another PDP-Context activation in addition to initiate another PDP-Context activation in addition to
the one already activated for a given APN (Access Point the one already activated for a given APN (Access Point
Name). Name). The purpose of initiating a second PDP-Context
is to achieve dual-stack connectivity by means of two
PDP-Contexts.
* If the subscription data or network configuration allows * If the subscription data or network configuration allows
only one IP address family (IPv4 or IPv6), the cellular only one IP address family (IPv4 or IPv6), the cellular
host must not request a second PDP-Context to the same host must not request a second PDP-Context to the same
APN for the other IP address family. APN for the other IP address family.
The text above focuses on the specification part which The text above focuses on the specification (excerpt from
explains the behavior for requesting IPv6-related PDP- [TS.23060] [TS.23401] [TS.24008]) which explains the
Context(s). Understanding this behavior is important to behavior for requesting IPv6-related PDP-Context(s).
avoid having broken IPv6 implementations in cellular
devices.
C_REC#3: The cellular host must support the PCO (Protocol C_REC#3: The cellular host must support the PCO (Protocol
Configuration Options) [TS.24008] to retrieve the IPv6 Configuration Options) [TS.24008] to retrieve the IPv6
address(es) of the Recursive DNS server(s). address(es) of the Recursive DNS server(s).
In-band signaling is a convenient method to inform the In-band signaling is a convenient method to inform the
cellular host about various services, including DNS cellular host about various services, including DNS
server information. It does not require any specific server information. It does not require any specific
protocol to be supported and it is already deployed in protocol to be supported and it is already deployed in
IPv4 cellular networks to convey such DNS information. IPv4 cellular networks to convey such DNS information.
skipping to change at page 7, line 51 skipping to change at page 8, line 6
This feature is useful to drive the behavior of the UE This feature is useful to drive the behavior of the UE
to be aligned with: (1) service-specific constraints to be aligned with: (1) service-specific constraints
such as the use of IPv6-only for VoLTE (Voice over LTE), such as the use of IPv6-only for VoLTE (Voice over LTE),
(2) network conditions with regards to the support of (2) network conditions with regards to the support of
specific PDP types (e.g., IPv4v6 PDP-Context is not specific PDP types (e.g., IPv4v6 PDP-Context is not
supported), (3) IPv4 sunset objectives, (4) subscription supported), (3) IPv4 sunset objectives, (4) subscription
data, etc. data, etc.
Note, a cellular host changing its connection between an Note, a cellular host changing its connection between an
IPv6-specific APN and an IPv4-specific APN restarts the IPv6-specific APN and an IPv4-specific APN will
ongoing applications. This may be considered as a interrupt related network connections. This may be
brokenness situation. considered as a brokenness situation by some
applications.
C_REC#7: Because of potential operational deficiencies to be C_REC#7: Because of potential operational deficiencies to be
experienced in some roaming situations, the cellular host experienced in some roaming situations, the cellular host
must be able to be configured with a home PDP-Context must be able to be configured with a home PDP-Context
type(s) and a roaming PDP-Context type(s). The purpose of type(s) and a roaming PDP-Context type(s). The purpose of
the of the roaming profile is to limit the PDP type(s) the roaming profile is to limit the PDP type(s) requested
requested by the cellular host when out of the home by the cellular host when out of the home network. Note
network. Note that distinct PDP type(s) and APN(s) can be that distinct PDP type(s) and APN(s) can be configured for
configured for home and roaming cases. home and roaming cases.
A detailed analysis of roaming failure cases is included A detailed analysis of roaming failure cases is included
in [RFC7445]. in [RFC7445].
C_REC#8: In order to ensure IPv4 service continuity in an IPv6-only C_REC#8: In order to ensure IPv4 service continuity in an IPv6-only
deployment context, the cellular host should support a deployment context, the cellular host should support a
method to locally construct IPv4-embedded IPv6 addresses method to learn PREFIX64(s).
[RFC6052]. A method to learn PREFIX64 should be supported
by the cellular host.
This solves the issue when applications use IPv4 In the context of NAT64, IPv6-enabled applications
referrals on IPv6-only access networks. relying on address referrals will fail because an
IPv6-only client won't be able to make use of an IPv4
address received in a referral. This feature allows to
solve the referral problem (because an IPv6-enabled
application can construct IPv4-embedded IPv6 addresses
[RFC6052]) and, also, to distinguish between
IPv4-converted IPv6 addresses and native IPv6 addresses.
In other words, this feature contributes to offload both
CLAT module (C_REC#9) and NAT64 devices. Refer to
Section 3 of [RFC7051] for an inventory of the issues
related to the discovery of PREFIX64(s).
In PCP-based environments, cellular hosts should follow In PCP-based environments, cellular hosts should follow
[RFC7225] to learn the IPv6 Prefix used by an upstream [RFC7225] to learn the IPv6 Prefix used by an upstream
PCP-controlled NAT64 device. If PCP is not enabled, the PCP-controlled NAT64 device. If PCP is not enabled, the
cellular host should implement the method specified in cellular host should implement the method specified in
[RFC7050] to retrieve the PREFIX64. [RFC7050] to retrieve the PREFIX64.
C_REC#9: In order to ensure IPv4 service continuity in an IPv6-only C_REC#9: In order to ensure IPv4 service continuity in an IPv6-only
deployment context, the cellular host should implement the deployment context, the cellular host should implement the
Customer Side Translator (CLAT, [RFC6877]) function in Customer Side Translator (CLAT, [RFC6877]) function in
skipping to change at page 9, line 30 skipping to change at page 9, line 40
L_REC#1: The cellular device must support Prefix Delegation L_REC#1: The cellular device must support Prefix Delegation
capabilities [RFC3633] and must support Prefix Exclude capabilities [RFC3633] and must support Prefix Exclude
Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation as defined in Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix Delegation as defined in
[RFC6603]. Particularly, it must behave as a Requesting [RFC6603]. Particularly, it must behave as a Requesting
Router. Router.
Cellular networks are more and more perceived as an Cellular networks are more and more perceived as an
alternative to fixed networks for home IP-based services alternative to fixed networks for home IP-based services
delivery; especially with the advent of smartphones and delivery; especially with the advent of smartphones and
3GPP data dongles. There is a need for an efficient 3GPP data dongles. There is a need for an efficient
mechanism to assign shorter prefix than /64 to cellular mechanism to assign larger prefixes (other than /64s) to
hosts so that each LAN segment can get its own /64 cellular hosts so that each LAN segment can get its own
prefix and multi-link subnet issues to be avoided. /64 prefix and multi-link subnet issues to be avoided.
In case a prefix is delegated to a cellular host using In case a prefix is delegated to a cellular host using
DHCPv6, the cellular device will be configured with two DHCPv6, the cellular device will be configured with two
prefixes: prefixes:
(1) one for 3GPP link allocated using SLAAC mechanism (1) one for 3GPP link allocated using SLAAC mechanism
and and
(2) another one delegated for LANs acquired during (2) another one delegated for LANs acquired during
Prefix Delegation operation. Prefix Delegation operation.
Note that the 3GPP network architecture requires both Note that the 3GPP network architecture requires both
the WAN (Wide Area Network) and the delegated prefix to the WAN (Wide Area Network) and the delegated prefix to
be aggregatable, so the subscriber can be identified be aggregatable, so the subscriber can be identified
using a single prefix. using a single prefix.
Without the Prefix Exclude Option, the delegating router Without the Prefix Exclude Option, the delegating router
(GGSN/PGW) will have to ensure [RFC3633] compliancy (GGSN/PGW) will have to ensure [RFC3633] compliancy
skipping to change at page 17, line 10 skipping to change at page 17, line 22
[RFC6146] Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful [RFC6146] Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful
NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6 NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6
Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011. Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011.
[RFC6147] Bagnulo, M., Sullivan, A., Matthews, P., and I. van [RFC6147] Bagnulo, M., Sullivan, A., Matthews, P., and I. van
Beijnum, "DNS64: DNS Extensions for Network Address Beijnum, "DNS64: DNS Extensions for Network Address
Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6147, Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6147,
April 2011. April 2011.
[RFC6342] Koodli, R., "Mobile Networks Considerations for IPv6
Deployment", RFC 6342, August 2011.
[RFC6434] Jankiewicz, E., Loughney, J., and T. Narten, "IPv6 Node [RFC6434] Jankiewicz, E., Loughney, J., and T. Narten, "IPv6 Node
Requirements", RFC 6434, December 2011. Requirements", RFC 6434, December 2011.
[RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, T., [RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, T.,
Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation
Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)", Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)",
RFC 6459, January 2012. RFC 6459, January 2012.
[RFC6724] Thaler, D., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown, [RFC6724] Thaler, D., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown,
"Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6 "Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6
 End of changes. 21 change blocks. 
55 lines changed or deleted 69 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/