Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor handset supports PD?

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 24/11/2020 à 23:28, David Allan I a écrit :
> FWIW for a 5G UE, the SMF assigns the interface ID used for LLA etc.
> as part of the PDU session setup.  See TS24.501 clause 9.11.4.10.

I will add a  reference to this document to the DANIR draft in the V6OPS WG.

I would like to ask whether typing 'what is my IP address' in the google
search bar of a 5G-connected smartphone displays an IPv6 address?

Alex

> 
> Cheers D
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: ipv6 <[e-mail]> On
> Behalf Of Templin (US), Fred L Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 1:52
> PM To: Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail] Subject: Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if
> neither operator nor handset supports PD?
> 
> Alex, see below:
> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: ipv6
>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu 
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 1:33 PM To: [e-mail] Subject:
>> Re: [v6ops] How do you solve 3GPP issue if neither operator nor
>> handset supports PD?
>> 
>> 
>> Le 24/11/2020 à 17:44, Templin (US), Fred L a écrit :
>>> Getting what I said earlier onto this thread, I think we should
>>> be discussing the LLA-based PD scheme specified in:
>>> 
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-6man-lla-type/
>>> 
>>> What is unique and compelling about this scheme is that it
>>> brings down two birds with one stone; in a single RS/RA exchange,
>>> the mobile node receives both 1) an IPv6 PD, and 2) an LLA that
>>> is guaranteed to be unique on the link without having to apply
>>> DAD.
>> 
>> YEs for 1), but for 2) one would also consider the IPv6CP part of
>> ppp and the PDP protocols.  These two protocols are also involved
>> in the negotiation of an IID, LLA or even a GUA some times, on that
>> link.
> 
> I assume this exchange happens even before the first IPv6 ND message
> exchange over the link? If so, then if the PDP protocols convey an
> OMNI LLA even before any IPv6 ND message exchange then the "PD"
> operation will already be complete since the OMNI LLA already
> contains the delegated prefix. Would that be a useful
> simplification?
> 
> Thanks - Fred
> 
>> Delegating a prefix is typically associated by an operation of 
>> insertion of an entry in a routing table.  That entry should have
>> a next hop address.  That address could be an LL address or a GUA. 
>> These are negotiated by these IPv6CP or PDP protocols.
>> 
>> If it is too complicated to make IPv6-PD option to use the
>> addresses created by IPv6CP or by PDP as nexthop, then one could
>> delegate a prefix without pointing to a nexthop, but using that old
>> p2p trick.
>> 
>> Also, the suggestion of this draft of using another LL address
>> comes down to associating several LL addresses to an interface;
>> because the LL address made by PDP or IPv6CP is always there.  If
>> such a 2nd LL address is associated to an interface, but is not
>> used in the Gateway as a nexthop field, then one wonders why
>> bothering forming it at all. An interface must always have one LL
>> address, and that is given by IPv6CP or PDP, I think.
>> 
>> I am not saying it is not a good idea, though.
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>>> 
>>> The idea for this LLA-based PD scheme is as follows:
>>> 
>>> 1) The requesting router creates a temporary LLA using
>>> RFC4941(bis) and sets a prefix length indication inside the LLA
>>> itself. The RR then uses the LLA as the IPv6 source address of an
>>> RS message to send to the delegating router.
>>> 
>>> 2) When the delegating router receives the RS, it sees that the
>>> IPv6 source is an RFC4941(bis) address with a non-zero prefix
>>> length indication. The DR then coordinates with the DHCPv6 server
>>> to request a PD of the length indicated by the RR.
>>> 
>>> 3) When the DR receives the PD from the DHCPv6 server, it creates
>>> an OMNI LLA by embedding the delegated prefix in the IID of
>>> fe80::/64, e.g., as fe80::2001:db8:1:2. The DR then sets a prefix
>>> length indication in the OMNI LLA, and sets the LLA as the
>>> destination address of an RA message to send back to the RR.
>>> 
>>> 4) When the RR receives the RA message, it sees that the
>>> destination is an OMNI LLA with a non-zero prefix length. The RR
>>> then uses the embedded prefix within the OMNI LLA as its
>>> delegated prefix, and regards the Router Lifetime as the time at
>>> which the delegated prefix needs to be renewed.
>>> 
>>> Questions?
>>> 
>>> Fred
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> 
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [e-mail] Administrative
>>> Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>
>>
>>> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [e-mail] Administrative
>> Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [e-mail] Administrative
> Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>