Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://mirror.msu.net/pub/rfc-editor/internet-drafts/draft-xcf-v6ops-chinatelecom-deployment-01.txt Дата изменения: Sun Jan 3 17:35:42 2016 Дата индексирования: Sun Apr 10 08:08:20 2016 Кодировка:

v6ops C. Xie
Internet-Draft C. Li
Intended status: Informational China Telecom Beijing Research
Expires: July 6, 2016 Institute
C. Bao
G. Han
X. Li
CERNET Center/Tsinghua
University
January 3, 2016


MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom
draft-xcf-v6ops-chinatelecom-deployment-01

Abstract

With the depletion of the IPv4 address space, large-scale SPs are now
faced with the real option to deploy IPv6 in a timely manner. In
order to achieve smooth transition to IPv6, migration tools should be
introduced for different deployment models. Among different IPv6
transition mechanisms, MAP-T is a stateless translation method which
can directly translate IPv4 packet to IPv6 packet. This document
describes the challenges and requirements for large SP to deploy IPv6
in operational network, the experimental results of MAP-T in our
laboratory and the field trials in large SP operational network.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

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."

This Internet-Draft will expire on July 6, 2016.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.



Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


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. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Major Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. IPv4-as-a-Service Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Architecture and Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Major Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Regulatory Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5. End-User Experience Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Design and Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Lab Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Field Trial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Observations and Experiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Effects on End-User . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Effects on Internal Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.3. Effects on Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Summary: Post-mortem Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Deviations from IETF Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8















Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


1. Introduction

The dramatic growth of the Internet is accelerating the exhaustion of
available IPv4 addressing pool. It is widely accepted that IPv6 is
the only real option on the table for the continued growth of the
Internet. However, IPv6 deployment is a huge systematic project and
a lot of challenges will arise especially in large SP operational
network.

1.1. Major Motivation

In order to achieve smooth transition to IPv6, migration tools should
be introduced for different deployment models, among which MAP-T
[I-D.ietf-softwire-map-t] is a stateless translation mechanism with
good scalability. This document describes the challenges and
requirements for large SPs in IPv6 transition period. Then, we
introduce MAP-T experimental results in our laboratory and the field
trials in large SP operational network.

1.2. IPv4-as-a-Service Requirements

In order to facilitate smooth IPv6 migration, some factors need to be
taken into consideration especially for large SPs. There are ten
major requirements:

1. It should deploy in an incremental fashion and the overall
transition process should be stable and operational.

2. It should largely reduce IPv4 public address consumption.

3. It should accelerate the deployment of IPv6, rather than just
prolonging the lifecycle of IPv4 by introducing multiple layers
of NAT.

4. There should be no perceived degradation of customer experience.
As a result, IPv6 transition mechanisms should provide IPv4
service continuity.

5. It should achieve scalability, simplicity and high availability,
especially for large-scale SPs.

6. It should have user management and network management ability.

7. It should support user authentication, authorization and
accounting as an essential part of operational network.

8. Most SPs need some kind of mechanisms to trace the origin of
traffic in their networks. This should also be available for



Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


IPv6 traffic.

9. It should have good throughput performance and massive
concurrent session support.

10. It should maintain the deployment concepts and business models
which have been proven and used with existing revenue generating
IPv4 services.

2. Architecture and Methodology

2.1. Major Design Considerations

The major objective listed in the following is to verify the
functionality and performance of MAP-T:

o Verify how to deploy MAP-T in practical network.

o Verify what applications can be used in MAP-T.

o Verify what Operating Systems can be supported in MAP-T.

o Verify the effect of user experience with limited ports.

o Verify the performance of MAP-T.

2.2. Regulatory Considerations

The government requires server operators to detect the packet sender
by source IP (and port) and therefore stateless address mapping
technologies are preferred. This will dramatically reduce the volume
of material required to be held for logging compliance.

In addition, the stateless translation technology is preferred, since
IPv6 addresses in the IPv6 packets everywhere in the network contain
both the IPv6 and IPv4 address information without the requirement of
decapsulation.

2.3. Security Considerations

From operation point of view, single stack (IPv6-only) is easier for
ensuring the security compared with the dual stack.

The stateless mechanism can help for the trace-back and identifying
the source addresses (and port).

The translation mechanism can help for configuring the access list
and rate-limiting control without decapsulation.



Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


2.4. Operational Considerations

The MAP-T deployment should support the DHCPv6-PD and MAP-T parameter
auto-configuration [I-D.ietf-softwire-map-dhcp], the PPPoE
authentication and source address tracing back.

2.5. End-User Experience Considerations

The major issues are:

o Application test: The applications we have tested include web,
email, Instant Message, ftp, telnet, SSH, video, Video Camera,
P2P, online game, Voip, VPN and so on.

o Operating System test: The OS we have tested includes Win7/8, OSX,
windows XP, iOS, Android, and Linux.

o Performance test: We have measured the parameters of concurrent
session number, throughput performance.

3. Design and Deployment

3.1. Lab Test

The lab test topology is Figure 1

+-----+ +-----+
|Host1+--+ CE1 +------+ ------
+-----+ +-----+ | //// \\\\
/-+--\ +----------+ // \\
// \\ | | | |
+-----+ +-----+ | IPv6 | | MAP-T BR | | IPv4 Internet |
|Host2+--+ CE2 +-+ Network +---| +--+ |
+-----+ +-----+ \\ // | | \\ //
|---+/ +----------+ \\\\ ////
| | ------
+-----+ +-----+ | |
|Host3+--+ CE3 +----+ |
+-----+ +-----+ | ------
| //// \\\\\
| |/ |
+----------------------+ IPv6 Internet |
| |
CEs are connted to the |\ /
IPv6 Network via BRAS \\\\ /////
(PPPoE and DHCPv6) ------

Figure 1: MAP-T Lab Test



Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


3.2. Field Trial

The deployment model of MAP-T in operational network is depicted in
Figure 2

---- -----
// \\ // \\ --------- --------
/ \ / \ // \\ // CPN
| +-----+ +----+ \ / --------
| | | Metro |BRAS| |-----|--End System
| Backbone|Core | Area |/SR | Access | | --------
| Network |Route| Network +----+ Network | CPE | --------
| | | |AAA | |-----|--End System
| +-----+ +----+ / | \ --------
\ / \ / \\ // | \\
\\ // \\ // -------- | ---------
---- ----|-- |
| |
-----------------| | |----------------| | |---------|
\ | / \ | / |
\---|--- / \--|--/ |
IPv6/IPv4 | MAP-T | IPv6-only |MAP-T| IPv6/IPv4 |
Internet | BR | Network | CE | Network |
/ ------- \ / ----- \ |
/ \ / \ |
----------------| |----------------| |--------|

Figure 2: MAP-T Field Trial

4. Observations and Experiences

4.1. Effects on End-User

o MAP-T can support all IPv4 applications, sam as NAT44.

o MAP-T can support a variety of Operating Systems.

o With the ratio of 128 (512 maximum concurrent sessions), there is
no perceived degradation of customer experience.

4.2. Effects on Internal Staff

o MAP-T can have good scalability. MAP-T BR does not need to
maintain any session state, and only limited session states have
to been maintained in CE for its customer.

o MAP-T can be deployed in an incremental way.




Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


o MAP-T supports DHCPv6-PD and PPPoE user authentication and the
function of the source address trace back.

4.3. Effects on Business

MAP-T can help to promote IPv6 business and to use public IPv4
address more effectively..

5. Summary: Post-mortem Report

MAP-T is a useful tool for IPv6 transition for large scale SPs.

5.1. Deviations from IETF Documents

The IETF RFCs for the testing and field trial are
[I-D.ietf-softwire-map], [I-D.ietf-softwire-map-t],
[I-D.ietf-softwire-map-dhcp] and [I-D.ietf-softwire-map-deployment]

6. IANA Considerations

This specification does not require any IANA actions.

7. Security Considerations

There are no other special security considerations.

8. Acknowledgements

9. References

9.1. Normative References

[I-D.ietf-softwire-map] Troan, O., Dec, W., Li, X., Bao,
C., Matsushima, S., Murakami, T.,
and T. Taylor, "Mapping of
Address and Port with
Encapsulation (MAP)",
draft-ietf-softwire-map-13 (work
in progress), March 2015.

[I-D.ietf-softwire-map-dhcp] Mrugalski, T., Troan, O., Farrer,
I., Perreault, S., Dec, W., Bao,
C., Yeh, L., and X. Deng, "DHCPv6
Options for configuration of
Softwire Address and Port Mapped
Clients",
draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp-12
(work in progress), March 2015.



Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


[I-D.ietf-softwire-map-t] Li, X., Bao, C., Dec, W., Troan,
O., Matsushima, S., and T.
Murakami, "Mapping of Address and
Port using Translation (MAP-T)",
draft-ietf-softwire-map-t-08
(work in progress),
December 2014.

9.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-softwire-map-deployment] Qiong, Q., Chen, M., Chen, G.,
Tsou, T., and S. Perreault,
"Mapping of Address and Port
(MAP) - Deployment
Considerations", draft-ietf-
softwire-map-deployment-06 (work
in progress), June 2015.

Authors' Addresses

Chongfeng Xie
China Telecom Beijing Research Institute
Room 708 No.118, Xizhimenneidajie, xicheng District
Beijing, 100035
China

Phone: +86-10-58552116
EMail: xiechf@ctbri.com.cn


Chen Li
China Telecom Beijing Research Institute
Room 708 No.118, Xizhimenneidajie, xicheng District
Beijing, 100035
China

Phone: +86-10-58552116
EMail: lichen@ctbri.com.cn













Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft MAP-T Trail in ChinaTelecom January 2016


Congxiao Bao
CERNET Center/Tsinghua University
Room 225, Main Building, Tsinghua University
Beijing, 100084
China

Phone: +86 10-62785983
EMail: congxiao@cernet.edu.cn


Guoliang Han
CERNET Center/Tsinghua University
Room 225, Main Building, Tsinghua University
Beijing 100084
CN

Phone: +86 10-62785983
EMail: bupthgl@gmail.com


Xing Li
CERNET Center/Tsinghua University
Room 225, Main Building, Tsinghua University
Beijing, 100084
China

Phone: +86 10-62785983
EMail: xing@cernet.edu.cn























Xie, et al. Expires July 6, 2016 [Page 9]