rfc9269.original | rfc9269.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
ICN Research Group Prakash Suthar | Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) P. Suthar | |||
Internet-Draft Google Inc. | Request for Comments: 9269 Google Inc. | |||
Intended status: Experimental Milan Stolic | Category: Informational M. Stolic | |||
Expires: 22 September 2022 Anil Jangam, Ed. | ISSN: 2070-1721 A. Jangam, Ed. | |||
Cisco Systems Inc. | Cisco Systems Inc. | |||
Dirk Trossen | D. Trossen | |||
Huawei Technologies | Huawei Technologies | |||
Ravi Ravindran | R. Ravindran | |||
F5 Networks | F5 Networks | |||
21 March 2022 | August 2022 | |||
Experimental Scenarios of ICN Integration in 4G Mobile Networks | Experimental Scenarios of Information-Centric Networking (ICN) | |||
draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-12 | Integration in 4G Mobile Networks | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
4G mobile network uses IP-based transport for the control plane to | A 4G mobile network uses IP-based transport for the control plane to | |||
establish the data session at the user plane for the actual data | establish the data session at the user plane for the actual data | |||
delivery. In the existing architecture, IP-based unicast is used for | delivery. In the existing architecture, IP-based unicast is used for | |||
the delivery of multimedia content to a mobile terminal, where each | the delivery of multimedia content to a mobile terminal, where each | |||
user is receiving a separate stream from the server. From a | user is receiving a separate stream from the server. From a | |||
bandwidth and routing perspective, this approach is inefficient. | bandwidth and routing perspective, this approach is inefficient. | |||
Evolved multimedia broadcast and multicast service (eMBMS) provides | Evolved multimedia broadcast and multicast service (eMBMS) provides | |||
capabilities for delivering contents to multiple users | capabilities for delivering contents to multiple users | |||
simultaneously, but its deployment is very limited or at an | simultaneously, but its deployment is very limited or at an | |||
experimental stage due to numerous challenges. The focus of this | experimental stage due to numerous challenges. The focus of this | |||
draft is to list the options for use of Information centric | document is to list the options for using Information-Centric | |||
technology (ICN) in 4G mobile networks and elaborate the experimental | Networking (ICN) in 4G mobile networks and elaborate the experimental | |||
setups for its further evaluation. The experimental setups discussed | setups for its further evaluation. The experimental setups discussed | |||
provide for using ICN either natively or with existing mobility | provide guidance for using ICN either natively or with an existing | |||
protocol stack. With further investigations based on the listed | mobility protocol stack. With further investigations based on the | |||
experiments, ICN with its inherent capabilities such as, network- | listed experiments, ICN with its inherent capabilities such as | |||
layer multicast, anchorless mobility, security, and optimized data | network-layer multicast, anchorless mobility, security, and optimized | |||
delivery using local caching at the edge may provide a viable | data delivery using local caching at the edge may provide a viable | |||
alternative to IP transport in 4G mobile networks. | alternative to IP transport in 4G mobile networks. | |||
Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is | |||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | published for informational purposes. | |||
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | ||||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | This document is a product of the Internet Research Task Force | |||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | (IRTF). The IRTF publishes the results of Internet-related research | |||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | and development activities. These results might not be suitable for | |||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | deployment. This RFC represents the consensus of the Information- | |||
Centric Networking Research Group of the Internet Research Task Force | ||||
(IRTF). Documents approved for publication by the IRSG are not | ||||
candidates for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC | ||||
7841. | ||||
This Internet-Draft will expire on 22 September 2022. | Information about the current status of this document, any errata, | |||
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at | ||||
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9269. | ||||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as | to this document. | |||
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | ||||
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. | ||||
Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction | |||
2. 3GPP Terminology and Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. 3GPP Terminology and Concepts | |||
3. 4G Mobile Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3. 4G Mobile Network Architecture | |||
3.1. Network Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.1. Network Overview | |||
3.2. Mobile Network Quality of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.2. Mobile Network Quality of Service | |||
3.3. Data Transport Using IP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 3.3. Data Transport Using IP | |||
3.4. Virtualized Mobile Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 3.4. Virtualized Mobile Networks | |||
4. Data Transport Using ICN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 4. Data Transport Using ICN | |||
5. Experimental Scenarios for ICN Deployment . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 5. Experimental Scenarios for ICN Deployment | |||
5.1. General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 5.1. General Considerations | |||
5.2. Scenarios of ICN Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 5.2. Scenarios of ICN Integration | |||
5.3. Integration of ICN in 4G Control Plane . . . . . . . . . 18 | 5.3. Integration of ICN in 4G Control Plane | |||
5.4. Integration of ICN in 4G User Plane . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 5.4. Integration of ICN in 4G User Plane | |||
5.4.1. Dual Transport (IP/ICN) Mode in Mobile Terminal . . . 20 | 5.4.1. Dual Transport (IP/ICN) Mode in Mobile Terminal | |||
5.4.2. Using ICN in Mobile Terminal . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 5.4.2. Using ICN in Mobile Terminal | |||
5.4.3. Using ICN in eNodeB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 5.4.3. Using ICN in eNodeB | |||
5.4.4. Using ICN in Packet Core (SGW, PGW) Gateways . . . . 27 | 5.4.4. Using ICN in Packet Core Gateways (SGW/PGW) | |||
5.5. An Experimental Test Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | 5.5. An Experimental Test Setup | |||
6. Expected Outcomes from Experimentation . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 6. Expected Outcomes from Experimentation | |||
6.1. Feeding into ICN Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 6.1. Feeding into ICN Research | |||
6.2. Use of Results Beyond Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | 6.2. Use of Results Beyond Research | |||
7. Security and Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | 7. IANA Considerations | |||
7.1. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 | 8. Security and Privacy Considerations | |||
7.2. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | 8.1. Security Considerations | |||
8. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 | 8.2. Privacy Considerations | |||
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | 9. Summary | |||
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | 10. References | |||
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | 10.1. Normative References | |||
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | 10.2. Informative References | |||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 | Acknowledgements | |||
Authors' Addresses | ||||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
4G mobile technology is built as an all-IP network using routing | 4G mobile technology is built as an all-IP network using routing | |||
protocols (OSPF, ISIS, BGP, etc.) to establish network routes. | protocols (OSPF, IS-IS, BGP, etc.) to establish network routes. The | |||
Stickiness of an IP address to a device is the key to get connected | stickiness of an IP address to a device is the key to getting | |||
to a mobile network. The same IP address is maintained through the | connected to a mobile network. The same IP address is maintained | |||
session until the device gets detached or moves to another network. | through the session until the device gets detached or moves to | |||
another network. | ||||
Key protocols used in 4G networks are GPRS Tunneling protocol (GTP), | Key protocols used in 4G networks are the General Packet Radio | |||
DIAMETER, and other protocols that are built on top of IP. One of | Service Tunneling Protocol (GTP), DIAMETER, and other protocols that | |||
the biggest challenges with IP-based routing in 4G is that it is not | are built on top of IP. One of the biggest challenges with IP-based | |||
optimized for data transport. As an alternative to IP routing, this | routing in 4G is that it is not optimized for data transport. As an | |||
draft presents and list the possible options for integration of | alternative to IP routing, this document presents and lists the | |||
Information Centric Networking (ICN) in 3GPP 4G mobile network, | possible options for integration of Information-Centric Networking | |||
offering an opportunity to leverage inherent ICN capabilities such as | (ICN) in 3GPP 4G mobile networks, offering an opportunity to leverage | |||
in-network caching, multicast, anchorless mobility management, and | inherent ICN capabilities such as in-network caching, multicast, | |||
authentication. This draft also discuss how those options affect | anchorless mobility management, and authentication. This document | |||
mobile providers and end users. | also discusses how those options affect mobile providers and end | |||
users. | ||||
The goal of the proposed experiments is to present possibilities to | The goal of the proposed experiments is to present possibilities to | |||
create simulated environments for evaluation of the benefits of ICN | create simulated environments for evaluation of the benefits of ICN | |||
protocol deployment in a 4G mobile network in different scenarios | protocol deployment in a 4G mobile network in different scenarios | |||
that have been analyzed in this document. The consensus of the | that have been analyzed in this document. The consensus of the | |||
Information-Centric Networking Research Group (ICNRG) is to publish | Information-Centric Networking Research Group (ICNRG) is to publish | |||
this document in order to facilitate experiments to show deployment | this document in order to facilitate experiments to show deployment | |||
options and qualitative and quantitative benefits of ICN protocol | options and qualitative and quantitative benefits of ICN protocol | |||
deployment in 4G mobile networks. | deployment in 4G mobile networks. | |||
2. 3GPP Terminology and Concepts | 2. 3GPP Terminology and Concepts | |||
1. Access Point Name | Access Point Name: The Access Point Name (APN) is a Fully Qualified | |||
Domain Name (FQDN) and resolves to a set of gateways in an | ||||
The Access Point Name (APN) is a Fully Qualified Domain Name | operator's network. An APN identifies the packet data network | |||
(FQDN) and resolves to a set of gateways in an operator's | (PDN) with which a mobile data user wants to communicate. In | |||
network. APN identifies the packet data network (PDN) with | addition to identifying a PDN, an APN may also be used to define | |||
which a mobile data user wants to communicate. In addition to | the type of service, QoS, and other logical entities inside a | |||
identifying a PDN, an APN may also be used to define the type of | Gateway General Packet Radio Service Support Node (GGSN) or a | |||
service, QoS, and other logical entities inside GGSN, PGW. | Packet Data Network Gateway (PGW). | |||
2. Control Plane | ||||
The control plane carries signaling traffic and is responsible | ||||
for routing between eNodeB and MME, MME and HSS, MME and SGW, | ||||
SGW and PGW, etc. Control plane signaling is required to | ||||
authenticate and authorize the mobile terminal and establish a | ||||
mobility session with mobile gateways (SGW/PGW). Control plane | ||||
functions also include system configuration and management. | ||||
3. Dual Address PDN/PDP Type | ||||
The dual address Packet Data Network/Packet Data Protocol (PDN/ | ||||
PDP) Type (IPv4v6) is used in 3GPP context, in many cases as a | ||||
synonym for dual stack, i.e., a connection type capable of | ||||
serving IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously. | ||||
4. eNodeB | ||||
The eNodeB is a base station entity that supports the Long-Term | ||||
Evolution (LTE) air interface. | ||||
5. Evolved Packet Core | ||||
The Evolved Packet Core (EPC) is an evolution of the 3GPP GPRS | ||||
system characterized by a higher-data-rate, lower-latency, | ||||
packet-optimized system. The EPC comprises some sub components | ||||
of the EPS core such as Mobility Management Entity (MME), | ||||
Serving Gateway (SGW), Packet Data Network Gateway (PDN-GW), and | ||||
Home Subscriber Server (HSS). | ||||
6. Evolved Packet System | ||||
The Evolved Packet System (EPS) is an evolution of the 3GPP GPRS | ||||
system characterized by a higher-data-rate, lower-latency, | ||||
packet-optimized system that supports multiple Radio Access | ||||
Technologies (RATs). The EPS comprises the EPC together with | ||||
the Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA) and the | ||||
Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN). | ||||
7. Evolved UTRAN | ||||
The E-UTRAN is a communications network sometimes referred to as | ||||
4G, and consists of eNodeB (4G base stations). The E-UTRAN | ||||
allows connectivity between the User Equipment and the core | ||||
network. | ||||
8. GPRS Tunneling Protocol | ||||
The GPRS Tunneling Protocol (GTP) [TS29.060] [TS29.274] | ||||
[TS29.281] is a tunneling protocol defined by 3GPP. It is a | ||||
network-based mobility protocol, working similar to Proxy Mobile | ||||
IPv6 (PMIPv6). However, GTP also provides functionality beyond | ||||
mobility, such as in-band signaling related to QoS and charging, | ||||
among others. | ||||
9. Gateway GPRS Support Node | ||||
The Gateway GPRS Support Node (GGSN) is a gateway function in | ||||
the GPRS and 3G network that provides connectivity to the | ||||
Internet or other PDNs. The host attaches to a GGSN identified | ||||
by an APN assigned to it by an operator. The GGSN also serves | ||||
as the topological anchor for addresses/prefixes assigned to the | ||||
User Equipment. | ||||
10. General Packet Radio Service | ||||
The General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) is a packet-oriented | ||||
mobile data service available to users of the 2G and 3G cellular | ||||
communication systems--the GSM--specified by 3GPP. | ||||
11. Home Subscriber Server | ||||
The Home Subscriber Server (HSS) is a database for a given | Control Plane: The control plane carries signaling traffic and is | |||
subscriber and was introduced in 3GPP Release-5. It is the | responsible for routing between the eNodeB and the Mobile | |||
entity containing subscription-related information to support | Management Entity (MME), the MME and the Home Subscriber Server | |||
the network entities that handle calls/sessions. | (HSS), the MME and the Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW), etc. Control | |||
plane signaling is required to authenticate and authorize the | ||||
mobile terminal and establish a mobility session with Mobile | ||||
Gateways (SGW/PGW). Control plane functions also include system | ||||
configuration and management. | ||||
12. Mobility Management Entity | Dual Address PDN/PDP Type: The dual address Packet Data Network / | |||
Packet Data Protocol (PDN/PDP) Type (IPv4v6) is used in 3GPP | ||||
context, in many cases as a synonym for dual stack, i.e., a | ||||
connection type capable of serving IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously. | ||||
The Mobility Management Entity (MME) is a network element | eNodeB: The eNodeB is a base station entity that supports the Long | |||
responsible for control plane functionalities, including | Term Evolution (LTE) air interface. | |||
authentication, authorization, bearer management, layer-2 | ||||
mobility, and so on. The MME is essentially the control plane | ||||
part of the SGSN in the GPRS. The user plane traffic bypasses | ||||
the MME. | ||||
13. Public Land Mobile Network | Evolved Packet Core: The Evolved Packet Core (EPC) is an evolution | |||
of the 3GPP GPRS system characterized by a higher-data-rate, | ||||
lower-latency, packet-optimized system. The EPC comprises some | ||||
subcomponents of the EPS core such as MME, Mobile Gateways (SGW/ | ||||
PGW), and HSS. | ||||
The Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) is a network operated by a | Evolved Packet System: The Evolved Packet System (EPS) is an | |||
single administration. A PLMN (and, therefore, also an | evolution of the 3GPP GPRS system characterized by a higher-data- | |||
operator) is identified by the Mobile Country Code (MCC) and the | rate, lower-latency, packet-optimized system that supports | |||
Mobile Network Code (MNC). Each (telecommunications) operator | multiple Radio Access Technologies (RATs). The EPS comprises the | |||
providing mobile services has its own PLMN. | EPC together with Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access | |||
(E-UTRA) and the Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access | ||||
Network (E-UTRAN). | ||||
14. Policy and Charging Control | Evolved UTRAN: The Evolved UTRAN (E-UTRAN) is a communications | |||
The Policy and Charging Control (PCC) framework is used for QoS | network sometimes referred to as 4G, and it consists of an eNodeB | |||
policy and charging control. It has two main functions: flow- | (4G base stations). The E-UTRAN allows connectivity between the | |||
based charging (including online credit control), and policy | User Equipment and the core network. | |||
control (for example, gating control, QoS control, and QoS | ||||
signaling). It is optional to 3GPP EPS but needed if dynamic | ||||
policy and charging control by means of PCC rules based on user | ||||
and services are desired. | ||||
15. Packet Data Network | Gateway GPRS Support Node: The Gateway GPRS Support Node (GGSN) is a | |||
gateway function in the GPRS and 3G network that provides | ||||
connectivity to the Internet or other PDNs. The host attaches to | ||||
a GGSN identified by an APN that is assigned to it by an operator. | ||||
The GGSN also serves as the topological anchor for addresses/ | ||||
prefixes assigned to the User Equipment. | ||||
The Packet Data Network (PDN) is a packet-based network that | General Packet Radio Service: The General Packet Radio Service | |||
either belongs to the operator or is an external network such as | (GPRS) is a packet-oriented mobile data service available to users | |||
the Internet or a corporate intranet. The user eventually | of the 2G and 3G cellular communication systems (the GSM) | |||
accesses services in one or more PDNs. The operator's packet | specified by 3GPP. | |||
core networks are separated from packet data networks either by | ||||
GGSNs or PDN Gateways (PGWs). | ||||
16. Serving Gateway | GPRS Tunneling Protocol: The GPRS Tunneling Protocol (GTP) | |||
[TS29.060] [TS29.274] [TS29.281] is a tunneling protocol defined | ||||
by 3GPP. It is a network-based mobility protocol that works | ||||
similarly to Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6). However, GTP also | ||||
provides functionality beyond mobility, such as in-band signaling | ||||
related to QoS and charging, among others. | ||||
The Serving Gateway (SGW) is a gateway function in the EPS, | Home Subscriber Server: The Home Subscriber Server (HSS) [TS29.336] | |||
which terminates the interface towards the E-UTRAN. The SGW is | is a database for a given subscriber and was introduced in 3GPP | |||
the Mobility Anchor point for layer-2 mobility (inter-eNodeB | Release 5. It is the entity containing subscription-related | |||
handovers). For each mobile terminal connected with the EPS, | information to support the network entities that handle calls/ | |||
there is only one SGW at any given point in time. The SGW is | sessions. | |||
essentially the user plane part of the GPRS's SGSN. | ||||
17. Packet Data Network Gateway | Mobile Terminal/User Equipment: The terms User Equipment (UE), | |||
Mobile Station (MS), Mobile Node (MN), and mobile refer to the | ||||
devices that are hosts with the ability to obtain Internet | ||||
connectivity via a 3GPP network. An MS comprises the Terminal | ||||
Equipment (TE) and an MT. The terms MT, MS, MN, and mobile are | ||||
used interchangeably within this document. | ||||
The Packet Data Network Gateway (PGW) is a gateway function in | Mobility Management Entity: The Mobility Management Entity (MME) is | |||
the Evolved Packet System (EPS), which provides connectivity to | a network element responsible for control plane functionalities, | |||
the Internet or other PDNs. The host attaches to a PGW | including authentication, authorization, bearer management, Layer | |||
identified by an APN assigned to it by an operator. The PGW | 2 mobility, and so on. The MME is essentially the control plane | |||
also serves as the topological anchor for addresses/prefixes | part of the SGSN in the GPRS. The user-plane traffic bypasses the | |||
assigned to the User Equipment. | MME. | |||
18. Packet Data Protocol Context | Packet Data Network: The Packet Data Network (PDN) is a packet-based | |||
network that either belongs to the operator or is an external | ||||
network such as the Internet or a corporate intranet. The user | ||||
eventually accesses services in one or more PDNs. The operator's | ||||
packet core networks are separated from packet data networks by | ||||
either GGSNs or PGWs. | ||||
A Packet Data Protocol (PDP) context is the equivalent of a | Packet Data Network Gateway: The Packet Data Network Gateway (PGW) | |||
virtual connection between the mobile terminal (MT) and a PDN | is a gateway function in the EPS, which provides connectivity to | |||
using a specific gateway. | the Internet or other PDNs. The host attaches to a PGW identified | |||
by an APN that is assigned to it by an operator. The PGW also | ||||
serves as the topological anchor for addresses/prefixes assigned | ||||
to the User Equipment. | ||||
19. Packet Data Protocol Type | Packet Data Protocol Context: A Packet Data Protocol (PDP) context | |||
is the equivalent of a virtual connection between the mobile | ||||
terminal (MT) and a PDN using a specific gateway. | ||||
A Packet Data Protocol Type (PDP Type) identifies the used/ | Packet Data Protocol Type: A Packet Data Protocol Type (PDP Type) | |||
allowed protocols within the PDP context. Examples are IPv4, | identifies the used/allowed protocols within the PDP context. | |||
IPv6, and IPv4v6 (dual-stack). | Examples are IPv4, IPv6, and IPv4v6 (dual stack). | |||
20. Serving GPRS Support Node | Policy and Charging Control: The Policy and Charging Control (PCC) | |||
The Serving GPRS Support Node (SGSN) is a network element | framework is used for QoS policy and charging control. It has two | |||
located between the radio access network (RAN) and the gateway | main functions: flow-based charging (including online credit | |||
(GGSN). A per-MT point-to-point (p2p) tunnel between the GGSN | control) and policy control (for example, gating control, QoS | |||
and SGSN transports the packets between the mobile terminal and | control, and QoS signaling). It is optional to 3GPP EPS but | |||
the gateway. | needed if dynamic policy and charging control by means of PCC | |||
rules based on user and services are desired. | ||||
21. Mobile Terminal/User Equipment | Public Land Mobile Network: The Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) is | |||
a network operated by a single administration. A PLMN (and | ||||
therefore also an operator) is identified by the Mobile Country | ||||
Code (MCC) and the Mobile Network Code (MNC). Each | ||||
(telecommunications) operator providing mobile services has its | ||||
own PLMN. | ||||
The terms User Equipment (UE), Mobile Station (MS), Mobile Node | Serving Gateway: The Serving Gateway (SGW) is a gateway function in | |||
(MN), and mobile refer to the devices that are hosts with the | the EPS, which terminates the interface towards the E-UTRAN. The | |||
ability to obtain Internet connectivity via a 3GPP network. An | SGW is the Mobility Anchor point for Layer 2 mobility (inter- | |||
MS comprises the Terminal Equipment (TE) and a Mobile Terminal | eNodeB handovers). For each mobile terminal connected with the | |||
(MT). The terms MT, MS, MN, and mobile are used interchangeably | EPS, there is only one SGW at any given point in time. The SGW is | |||
within this document. | essentially the user-plane part of the GPRS's SGSN. | |||
22. User Plane | Serving GPRS Support Node: The Serving GPRS Support Node (SGSN) is a | |||
network element located between the Radio Access Network (RAN) and | ||||
the gateway (GGSN). A per-MT point-to-point (P2P) tunnel between | ||||
the GGSN and SGSN transports the packets between the mobile | ||||
terminal and the gateway. | ||||
The user plane refers to data traffic and the required bearers | User Plane: The user plane refers to data traffic and the required | |||
for the data traffic. In practice, IP is the only data traffic | bearers for the data traffic. In practice, IP is the only data | |||
protocol used in the user plane. | traffic protocol used in the user plane. | |||
3. 4G Mobile Network Architecture | 3. 4G Mobile Network Architecture | |||
This section provide a high-level overview of typical 4G mobile | This section provides a high-level overview of typical 4G mobile | |||
network architecture and their key functions related to a possibility | network architecture and the key functions related to the possibility | |||
of using of ICN technology. | of its use with ICN technology. | |||
3.1. Network Overview | 3.1. Network Overview | |||
4G mobile networks are designed to use IP transport for communication | 4G mobile networks are designed to use IP transport for communication | |||
among different elements such as eNodeB, MME, SGW/PGW, HSS, PCRF, | among different elements such as the eNodeB, MME, SGW, PGW, HSS, | |||
etc. [GRAYSON]. For backward compatibility with 3G, it has support | Policy and Charging Rule Function (PCRF), etc. [GRAYSON]. For | |||
for legacy Circuit Switch features such as voice and SMS through | backward compatibility with 3G, it has support for legacy circuit | |||
transitional CS fallback and flexible IMS deployment. For each | switch features such as voice and SMS through transitional CS | |||
mobile device attached to the radio (eNodeB), there is a separate | fallback and flexible IP Multimedia Subsystems (IMS) deployment. For | |||
overlay tunnel (GPRS Tunneling Protocol, GTP) between eNodeB and | each mobile device attached to the radio (eNodeB), there is a | |||
Mobile gateways (i.e., SGW, PGW). | separate overlay tunnel (GTP) between the eNodeB and Mobile Gateways | |||
(i.e., SGW/PGW). | ||||
When any mobile terminal is powered up, it attaches to a mobile | When any mobile terminal is powered up, it attaches to a mobile | |||
network based on its configuration and subscription. After a | network based on its configuration and subscription. After a | |||
successful attachment procedure, the mobile terminal registers with | successful attachment procedure, the mobile terminal registers with | |||
the mobile core network using IPv4 and/or IPv6 address based on | the mobile core network using IPv4 and/or IPv6 addresses based on | |||
request and capabilities offered by mobile gateways. | request and capabilities offered by Mobile Gateways. | |||
The GTP tunnel is used to carry user traffic between gateways and | The GTP tunnel is used to carry user traffic between gateways and | |||
mobile terminal, therefore using the unicast delivery for any data | mobile terminals, therefore using the unicast delivery for any data | |||
transfer. It is also important to understand the overhead of GTP and | transfer. It is also important to understand the overhead of GTP and | |||
IPSec protocols. All mobile backhaul traffic is encapsulated using a | IPsec protocols. All mobile backhaul traffic is encapsulated using a | |||
GTP tunnel, which has overhead of 8 bytes on top of IP and UDP | GTP tunnel, which has overhead of 8 bytes on top of IP and UDP | |||
[NGMN]. Additionally, if IPSec is used for security (which is often | [NGMN]. Additionally, if IPsec is used for security (which is often | |||
required if the Service Provider is using a shared backhaul), it adds | required if the Service Provider is using a shared backhaul), it adds | |||
overhead based on the IPSec tunneling model (tunnel or transport) as | overhead based on the IPsec tunneling model (tunnel or transport) as | |||
well as the encryption and authentication header algorithm used. If | well as the encryption and authentication header algorithm used. If | |||
we consider as an example an Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) | we consider an Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) encryption as an | |||
encryption, the overhead can be significant [OLTEANU], particularly | example, the overhead can be significant [OLTEANU], particularly for | |||
for smaller payloads. | smaller payloads. | |||
+-------+ Diameter +-------+ | +-------+ Diameter +-------+ | |||
| HSS |------------| SPR | | | HSS |------------| SPR | | |||
+-------+ +-------+ | +-------+ +-------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
+------+ +------+ S4 | +-------+ | +------+ +------+ S4 | +-------+ | |||
| 3G |---| SGSN |----------------|------+ +------| PCRF | | | 3G |---| SGSN |----------------|------+ +------| PCRF | | |||
^ |NodeB | | |---------+ +---+ | | +-------+ | ^ |NodeB | | |---------+ +---+ | | +-------+ | |||
+-+ | +------+ +------+ S3 | | S6a | |Gxc | | +-+ | +------+ +------+ S3 | | S6a | |Gxc | | |||
| | | +-------+ | | |Gx | | | | +-------+ | | |Gx | |||
skipping to change at page 8, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at line 341 ¶ | |||
|non-3GPP | |non-3GPP | +-----+ | |non-3GPP | |non-3GPP | +-----+ | |||
+---------+ +---------+ | +---------+ +---------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
+-+ +-+ | +-+ +-+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
+-+ +-+ | +-+ +-+ | |||
MT MT | MT MT | |||
Figure 1: 4G Mobile Network Overview | Figure 1: 4G Mobile Network Overview | |||
If we consider the combined impact of GTP, IPSec and unicast traffic, | If we consider the combined impact of GTP, IPsec, and unicast | |||
the data delivery is not efficient because of overhead. The IETF has | traffic, the data delivery is not efficient because of overhead. The | |||
developed various header compression algorithms to reduce the | IETF has developed various header compression algorithms to reduce | |||
overhead associated with IP packets. Some techniques are robust | the overhead associated with IP packets. Some techniques are RObust | |||
header compression (ROHC) and enhanced compression of the real-time | Header Compression (ROHC) and Enhanced Compression RTP (ECRTP) so | |||
transport protocol (ECRTP) so that the impact of overhead created by | that the impact of overhead created by GTP, IPsec, etc., is reduced | |||
GTP, IPsec, etc., is reduced to some extent [BROWER]. For commercial | to some extent [BROWER]. For commercial mobile networks, 3GPP has | |||
mobile networks, 3GPP has adopted different mechanisms for header | adopted different mechanisms for header compression to achieve | |||
compression to achieve efficiency in data delivery [TS25.323]; those | efficiency in data delivery [TS25.323]; those solutions can be | |||
solutions can be adapted to other data protocols, such as ICN, too | adapted to other data protocols too such as ICN [RFC9139] [TLVCOMP]. | |||
[ICNLOWPAN] [TLVCOMP]. | ||||
3.2. Mobile Network Quality of Service | 3.2. Mobile Network Quality of Service | |||
During the mobile terminal attachment procedure, a default bearer is | During the mobile terminal attachment procedure, a default bearer is | |||
created for each mobile terminal and it is assigned to the default | created for each mobile terminal and it is assigned to the default | |||
Access Point Name (APN), which provides the default transport. For | Access Point Name (APN), which provides the default transport. For | |||
any QoS-aware application, one or more new dedicated bearers are | any QoS-aware application, one or more new dedicated bearers are | |||
established between eNodeB and Mobile Gateway. Dedicated bearer can | established between an eNodeB and a Mobile Gateway. A dedicated | |||
be requested either by mobile terminal or mobile gateway based on | bearer can be requested by either a mobile terminal or a Mobile | |||
direction of first data flow. There are many bearers (logical paths) | Gateway based on the direction of the first data flow. There are | |||
established between eNodeB and mobile gateway for each mobile | many bearers (logical paths) established between an eNodeB and a | |||
terminal catering to different data flow simultaneously. | Mobile Gateway for each mobile terminal catering to a different data | |||
flow simultaneously. | ||||
While all traffic within a certain bearer receives the same | While all traffic within a certain bearer receives the same | |||
treatment, QoS parameters supporting these requirements can be very | treatment, QoS parameters supporting these requirements can be very | |||
granular in different bearers. These values vary for the control, | granular in different bearers. These values vary for the control, | |||
management and user traffic, and can be very different depending on | management, and user traffic, and can be very different depending on | |||
application key parameters such as latency, jitter (important for | application key parameters such as latency, jitter (important for | |||
voice and other real-time applications), packet loss, and queuing | voice and other real-time applications), packet loss, and queuing | |||
mechanism (strict priority, low-latency, fair, and so on). | mechanism (strict priority, low latency, fair, and so on). | |||
Implementation of QoS for mobile networks is done at two stages: at | Implementation of QoS for mobile networks is done at two stages: 1) | |||
content prioritization/marking and transport marking, and congestion | content prioritization/marking and transport marking and 2) | |||
management. From the transport perspective, QoS is defined at layer | congestion management. From the transport perspective, QoS is | |||
2 as class of service (CoS) and at layer 3 as Differentiated Services | defined at Layer 2 as Class of Service (CoS) and at Layer 3 as | |||
(DS). The mapping of DSCP to CoS takes place at layer 2/3 switching | Differentiated Services (DS). The mapping of the Differentiated | |||
and routing elements. 3GPP has a specified a QoS Class Identifier | Services Code Point (DSCP) to CoS takes place at Layer 2/3 switching | |||
and routing elements. 3GPP has a specified QoS Class Identifier | ||||
(QCI), which represents different types of content and equivalent | (QCI), which represents different types of content and equivalent | |||
mappings to the DSCP at transport layer [TS23.401]. However, this | mappings to the DSCP at the transport layer [TS23.401]. However, | |||
requires manual configuration at different elements and is therefore | this requires manual configuration at different elements and is | |||
prone to possible misconfigurations. | therefore prone to possible misconfigurations. | |||
In summary, QoS configuration in mobile networks for user plane | In summary, QoS configuration in mobile networks for user-plane | |||
traffic requires synchronization of parameters among different | traffic requires synchronization of parameters among different | |||
platforms. Normally, QoS in IP is implemented using DiffServ, which | platforms. Normally, QoS in IP is implemented using DiffServ, which | |||
uses hop-by-hop QoS configuration at each router. Any inconsistency | uses hop-by-hop QoS configuration at each router. Any inconsistency | |||
in IP QoS configuration at routers in the forwarding path can result | in IP QoS configuration at routers in the forwarding path can result | |||
in a poor subscriber experience (e.g., packet classified as high | in a poor subscriber experience (e.g., a packet classified as high | |||
priority can go to a lower priority queue). By deploying ICN, we | priority can go to a lower-priority queue). By deploying ICN, we | |||
intend to enhance the subscriber experience using policy-based | intend to enhance the subscriber experience using policy-based | |||
configuration, which can be associated with the named contents | configuration, which can be associated with the named contents | |||
[ICNQoS] at the ICN forwarder. Further investigation is underway to | [ICNQoS] at the ICN forwarder. Further investigation is underway to | |||
understand how QoS in ICN [I-D.anilj-icnrg-dnc-qos-icn] can be | understand how QoS in ICN [QoS-ICN] can be implemented with reference | |||
implemented with reference to the ICN QoS guidelines [RFC9064] to | to the ICN QoS guidelines [RFC9064] to meet the QoS requirements | |||
meet the QoS requirements [RFC4594]. | [RFC4594]. | |||
3.3. Data Transport Using IP | 3.3. Data Transport Using IP | |||
The data delivered to mobile devices is sent in unicast semantic | The data delivered to mobile devices is sent in unicast semantic | |||
inside the GTP tunnel from an eNodeB to a PDN gateway (PGW), as | inside the GTP tunnel from an eNodeB to a PDN gateway (PGW) as | |||
described in 3GPP specifications [TS23.401]. While the technology | described in 3GPP specifications [TS23.401]. While the technology | |||
exists to address the issue of possible multicast delivery, there are | exists to address the issue of possible multicast delivery, there are | |||
many difficulties related to multicast protocol implementations on | many difficulties related to multicast protocol implementations on | |||
the RAN side of the network. By using eMBMS [EMBMS], multicast | the RAN side of the network. By using eMBMS [EMBMS], multicast | |||
routing can be enabled in mobile backhaul between eNodeB and Mobile | routing can be enabled in mobile backhaul between an eNodeB and | |||
Gateways (SGW) however for radio interface it requires broadcast | Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW); however, for radio interface it requires | |||
which implies that we need dedicated radio channel. Implementation | broadcast, which implies that we need a dedicated radio channel. | |||
of eMBMS in RAN is still lagging behind due to complexities related | Implementation of eMBMS in RAN is still lagging behind due to | |||
to client mobility, handovers, and the fact that the potential gain | complexities related to client mobility, handovers, and the fact that | |||
to Service Providers may not justify the investment, which explains | the potential gain to Service Providers may not justify the | |||
the prevalence of unicast delivery in mobile networks. Techniques to | investment, which explains the prevalence of unicast delivery in | |||
handle multicast (such as LTE-B or eMBMS) have been designed to | mobile networks. Techniques to handle multicast (such as LTE-B or | |||
handle pre-planned content delivery, such as live content, which | eMBMS) have been designed to handle pre-planned content delivery, | |||
contrasts user behavior today, largely based on content (or video) on | such as live content, which contrasts user behavior today, largely | |||
demand model. | based on a content (or video) on-demand model. | |||
To ease the burden on the bandwidth of the SGi interface, caching is | To ease the burden on the bandwidth of the Service Gateway interface | |||
introduced in a similar manner as with many Enterprises. In mobile | (SGi), caching is introduced in a similar manner as with many | |||
networks, whenever possible, cached data is delivered. Caching | enterprises. In mobile networks, whenever possible, cached data is | |||
servers are placed at a centralized location, typically in the | delivered. Caching servers are placed at a centralized location, | |||
Service Provider's Data Center, or in some cases lightly distributed | typically in the Service Provider's Data Center, or in some cases | |||
in Packet Core locations with the PGW nodes close to the Internet and | lightly distributed in packet core locations with the PGW nodes close | |||
IP services access (SGi interface). This is a very inefficient | to the Internet and IP services access (SGi). This is a very | |||
concept because traffic must traverse the entire backhaul path for | inefficient concept because traffic must traverse the entire backhaul | |||
the data to be delivered to the end user. Other issues, such as out- | path for the data to be delivered to the end user. Other issues, | |||
of-order delivery, contribute to this complexity and inefficiency, | such as out-of-order delivery, contribute to this complexity and | |||
which needs to be addressed at the application level. | inefficiency, which needs to be addressed at the application level. | |||
3.4. Virtualized Mobile Networks | 3.4. Virtualized Mobile Networks | |||
The Mobile gateways deployed in a major Service Provider network are | The Mobile Gateways deployed in a major Service Provider network are | |||
either based on dedicated hardware or, commercially off the shelf | based on either dedicated hardware or commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) | |||
(COTS) based x86 technology. With the adoption of Mobile Virtual | x86 technology. With the adoption of Mobile Virtual Network | |||
Network Operators (MVNO), public safety networks, and enterprise | Operators (MVNOs), public safety networks, and enterprise mobility | |||
mobility networks, elastic mobile core architecture are needed. By | networks, elastic mobile core architecture is needed. By deploying | |||
deploying the mobile packet core on COTS platform, using a | the mobile packet core on a COTS platform, using a Network Function | |||
virtualized infrastructure (NFVI) framework and end-to-end | Virtualization Infrastructure (NFVI) framework and end-to-end | |||
orchestration, new deployments can be simplified to provide optimized | orchestration, new deployments can be simplified to provide optimized | |||
total cost of ownership (TCO). | total cost of ownership (TCO). | |||
While virtualization is growing, and many mobile providers use a | While virtualization is growing, and many mobile providers use a | |||
hybrid architecture that consists of dedicated and virtualized | hybrid architecture that consists of dedicated and virtualized | |||
infrastructures, the control, and data planes are still the same. | infrastructures, the control and data planes are still the same. | |||
There is also work under way to separate the control and user plane | There is also work underway to separate the control and user plane | |||
for the network to scale better. Virtualized mobile networks and | for the network to scale better. Virtualized mobile networks and | |||
network slicing with control and user plane separation provide a | network slicing with control and user-plane separation provide a | |||
mechanism to evolve the GTP-based architecture towards an OpenFlow | mechanism to evolve the GTP-based architecture towards an OpenFlow | |||
SDN-based signaling for 4G and proposed 5G core. Some early | with signaling based on Software-Defined Networking (SDN) for 4G and | |||
architecture work for 5G mobile technologies provides a mechanism for | proposed 5G core. Some early architecture work for 5G mobile | |||
control and user plane separation and simplifies the mobility call | technologies provides a mechanism for control and user-plane | |||
flow by introducing OpenFlow-based signaling [ICN5G]. This has been | separation and simplifies the mobility call flow by introducing | |||
considered by 3GPP [EPCCUPS] and is also described in [SDN5G]. | OpenFlow-based signaling [ICN5G]. This has been considered by 3GPP | |||
[EPCCUPS] and is also described in [SDN5G]. | ||||
4. Data Transport Using ICN | 4. Data Transport Using ICN | |||
For mobile devices, the edge connectivity is between mobile terminal | For mobile devices, the edge connectivity is between a mobile | |||
and a router or mobile edge computing (MEC) [MECSPEC] element. Edge | terminal and a router or mobile edge computing (MEC) [MECSPEC] | |||
computing has the capability of processing client requests and | element. Edge computing has the capability of processing client | |||
segregating control and user traffic at the edge of radio, rather | requests and segregating control and user traffic at the edge of | |||
than sending all requests to the mobile gateway. | radio rather than sending all requests to the Mobile Gateway. | |||
+----------+ | +----------+ | |||
| Content +----------------------------------------+ | | Content +----------------------------------------+ | |||
| Publisher| | | | Publisher| | | |||
+---+---+--+ | | +---+---+--+ | | |||
| | +--+ +--+ +--+ | | | | +--+ +--+ +--+ | | |||
| +--->|R1|------------>|R2|---------->|R4| | | | +--->|R1|------------>|R2|---------->|R4| | | |||
| +--+ +--+ +--+ | | | +--+ +--+ +--+ | | |||
| | Cached | | | | Cached | | |||
| v content | | | v content | | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at line 490 ¶ | |||
+---------------| |-------------| |-------------+ | +---------------| |-------------| |-------------+ | |||
+-+ +-+ | +-+ +-+ | |||
Consumer-1 Consumer-2 | Consumer-1 Consumer-2 | |||
Mobile Terminal Mobile Terminal | Mobile Terminal Mobile Terminal | |||
===> Content flow from cache | ===> Content flow from cache | |||
---> Content flow from publisher | ---> Content flow from publisher | |||
Figure 2: ICN Architecture | Figure 2: ICN Architecture | |||
Edge computing transforms radio access network into an intelligent | Edge computing transforms a Radio Access Network into an intelligent | |||
service edge capable of delivering services directly from the edge of | service edge capable of delivering services directly from the edge of | |||
the network, while providing the best possible performance to the | the network while providing the best possible performance to the | |||
client. Edge computing can be an ideal candidate for implementing | client. Edge computing can be an ideal candidate for implementing | |||
ICN forwarders in addition to its usual function of managing mobile | ICN forwarders in addition to its usual function of managing mobile | |||
termination. In addition to edge computing, other transport | termination. In addition to edge computing, other transport | |||
elements, such as routers, can work as ICN forwarders. | elements, such as routers, can work as ICN forwarders. | |||
Data transport using ICN is different to IP-based transport by | Data transport using ICN is different than IP-based transport as it | |||
introducing uniquely named-data as a core design principle. | introduces uniquely named-data as a core design principle. | |||
Communication in ICN takes place between the content provider | Communication in ICN takes place between the content provider | |||
(producer) and the end user (consumer), as described in Figure 2. | (producer) and the end user (consumer), as described in Figure 2. | |||
Every node in a physical path between a client and a content provider | Every node in a physical path between a client and a content provider | |||
is called the ICN forwarder or router. It can route the request | is called the ICN forwarder or router. It can route the request | |||
intelligently and cache content so it can be delivered locally for | intelligently and cache content so it can be delivered locally for | |||
subsequent requests from any other client. For mobile networks, | subsequent requests from any other client. For mobile networks, | |||
transport between a client and a content provider consists of radio | transport between a client and a content provider consists of a radio | |||
network + mobile backhaul and IP core transport + Mobile Gateways + | network + mobile backhaul and IP core transport + Mobile Gateways + | |||
Internet + content data network (CDN). | Internet + Content Delivery Network (CDN). | |||
To understand the suitability of ICN for mobile networks, we will | To understand the suitability of ICN for mobile networks, we will | |||
discuss the ICN framework by describing its protocols architecture | discuss the ICN framework by describing its protocol architecture and | |||
and different types of messages to then consider how we can use this | different types of messages; this will be helpful when considering | |||
in mobile networks for delivering content more efficiently. ICN uses | how to use ICN in mobile networks to deliver content more | |||
two types of packets called "interest packet" and "data packet" as | efficiently. ICN uses two types of packets called "interest packet" | |||
described in Figure 3. | and "data packet" as described in Figure 3. | |||
+------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------------+ | |||
Interest | +------+ +------+ +------+ | +-----+ | Interest | +------+ +------+ +------+ | +-----+ | |||
+-+ ---->| CS |---->| PIT |---->| FIB |--------->| CDN | | +-+ ---->| CS |---->| PIT |---->| FIB |--------->| CDN | | |||
| | | +------+ +------+ +------+ | +-----+ | | | | +------+ +------+ +------+ | +-----+ | |||
+-+ | | Add | Drop | | Forward | +-+ | | Add | Drop | | Forward | |||
MT <--------+ Intf v Nack v | | MT <--------+ Intf v Nack v | | |||
Data | | | Data | | | |||
+------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------------+ | |||
+------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------------+ | |||
+-+ | Forward +------+ | +-----+ | +-+ | Forward +------+ | +-----+ | |||
| | <-------------------------------------| PIT |<---------| CDN | | | | <-------------------------------------| PIT |<---------| CDN | | |||
+-+ | | Cache +--+---+ | Data +-----+ | +-+ | | Cache +--+---+ | Data +-----+ | |||
MT | +--v---+ | | | MT | +--v---+ | | | |||
| | CS | v | | | | CS | v | | |||
| +------+ Discard | | | +------+ Discard | | |||
+------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------------+ | |||
Figure 3: ICN Interest, Data Packet and Forwarder | Figure 3: ICN Interest, Data Packet, and Forwarder | |||
In an 4G network, when a mobile device wants to receive certain | In a 4G network, when a mobile device wants to receive certain | |||
content, it will send an Interest message to the closest eNodeB. | content, it will send an Interest message to the closest eNodeB. | |||
Interest packets follow the TLV format [RFC8609] and contain | Interest packets follow the TLV format [RFC8609] and contain | |||
mandatory fields, such as name of the content and content matching | mandatory fields such as the name of the content and content-matching | |||
restrictions (KeyIdRestr and ContentObjectHashRestr), expressed as a | restrictions (KeyIdRestr and ContentObjectHashRestr) expressed as a | |||
tuple [RFC8569]. The content matching tuple uniquely identifies the | tuple [RFC8569]. The content-matching tuple uniquely identifies the | |||
matching data packet for the given Interest packet. Another | matching data packet for the given Interest packet. Another | |||
attribute called HopLimit is used to detect looping Interest | attribute called "HopLimit" is used to detect looping Interest | |||
messages. | messages. | |||
An ICN router will receive an Interest packet and lookup if a request | An ICN router will receive an Interest packet and lookup if a request | |||
for such content has arrived earlier from another client. If so, it | for such content has arrived earlier from another client. If so, it | |||
may be served from the local cache; otherwise, the request is | may be served from the local cache; otherwise, the request is | |||
forwarded to the next-hop ICN router. Each ICN router maintains | forwarded to the next-hop ICN router. Each ICN router maintains | |||
three data structures: Pending Interest Table (PIT), Forwarding | three data structures: Pending Interest Table (PIT), Forwarding | |||
Information Base (FIB), and Content Store (CS). The Interest packet | Information Base (FIB), and Content Store (CS). The Interest packet | |||
travels hop-by-hop towards the content provider. Once the Interest | travels hop by hop towards the content provider. Once the Interest | |||
packet reaches the content provider, it will return a Data packet | packet reaches the content provider, it will return a data packet | |||
containing information such as content name, signature, and the | containing information such as content name, signature, and the | |||
actual data. | actual data. | |||
The data packet travels in reverse direction following the same path | The data packet travels in reverse direction following the same path | |||
taken by the Interest packet, maintaining routing symmetry. Details | taken by the Interest packet, maintaining routing symmetry. Details | |||
about algorithms used in PIT, FIB, CS, and security trust models are | about algorithms used in PIT, FIB, CS, and security trust models are | |||
described in various resources [CCN]; here, we have explained the | described in various resources [CCN]; here, we have explained the | |||
concept and its applicability to the 4G network. | concept and its applicability to the 4G network. | |||
5. Experimental Scenarios for ICN Deployment | 5. Experimental Scenarios for ICN Deployment | |||
In 4G mobile networks, both user and control plane traffic have to be | In 4G mobile networks, both user and control plane traffic have to be | |||
transported from the edge to the mobile packet core via IP transport. | transported from the edge to the mobile packet core via IP transport. | |||
The evolution of the existing mobile packet core using Control and | The evolution of the existing mobile packet core using Control and | |||
User Plane Separation (CUPS) [TS23.714] enables flexible network and | User Plane Separation (CUPS) [TS23.714] enables flexible networking | |||
operations by distributed deployment and the independent scaling of | and operations by distributed deployment and the independent scaling | |||
control plane and user plane functions - while not affecting the | of control plane and user-plane functions while not affecting the | |||
functionality of existing nodes subject to this split. | functionality of existing nodes subject to this split. | |||
In this section, we analyze the potential impact of ICN on control | In this section, we analyze the potential impact of ICN on control | |||
and user plane traffic for centralized and disaggregated CUPS-based | and user-plane traffic for centralized and disaggregated CUPS-based | |||
mobile network architecture. We list various experimental options | mobile network architecture. We list various experimental options | |||
and opportunities to study the feasibility of the deployment of ICN | and opportunities to study the feasibility of the deployment of ICN | |||
in 4G networks. The proposed experiments would help the network and | in 4G networks. The proposed experiments would help the network and | |||
OEM designers to understand various issues, optimizations, and | original equipment manufacturer (OEM) designers to understand various | |||
advantages of deployment of ICN in 4G networks. | issues, optimizations, and advantages of the deployment of ICN in 4G | |||
networks. | ||||
5.1. General Considerations | 5.1. General Considerations | |||
In the CUPS architecture, there is an opportunity to shorten the path | In the CUPS architecture, there is an opportunity to shorten the path | |||
for user plane traffic by deploying offload nodes closer to the edge | for user-plane traffic by deploying offload nodes closer to the edge | |||
[OFFLOAD]. With this major architecture change, a User Plane | [OFFLOAD]. With this major architecture change, a User Plane | |||
Function (UPF) node is placed close to the edge so traffic no longer | Function (UPF) node is placed close to the edge so traffic no longer | |||
needs to traverse the entire backhaul path to reach the EPC. In many | needs to traverse the entire backhaul path to reach the EPC. In many | |||
cases, where feasible, the UPF can be collocated with the eNodeB, | cases, where feasible, the UPF can be collocated with the eNodeB, | |||
which is also a business decision based on user demand. Placing a | which is also a business decision based on user demand. Placing a | |||
Publisher close to the offload site, or at the offload site, provides | Publisher close to the offload site, or at the offload site, provides | |||
for a significant improvement in user experience, especially with | for a significant improvement in user experience, especially with | |||
latency-sensitive applications. This capability allows for the | latency-sensitive applications. This capability allows for the | |||
introduction of ICN and amplifies its advantages. | introduction of ICN and amplifies its advantages. | |||
5.2. Scenarios of ICN Integration | 5.2. Scenarios of ICN Integration | |||
The integration of ICN provides an opportunity to further optimize | The integration of ICN provides an opportunity to further optimize | |||
the existing data transport in 4G mobile networks. The various | the existing data transport in 4G mobile networks. The various | |||
opportunities from the coexistence of ICN and IP transport in the | opportunities from the coexistence of ICN and IP transport in the | |||
mobile network are somewhat analogous to the deployment scenarios | mobile network are somewhat analogous to the deployment scenarios | |||
when IPv6 was introduced to interoperate with IPv4 except, with ICN, | when IPv6 was introduced to interoperate with IPv4 except, with ICN, | |||
the whole IP stack can be replaced. We have reviewed [RFC6459] and | the whole IP stack can be replaced. We have reviewed [RFC6459] and | |||
analyzed the impact of ICN on control plane signaling and user plane | analyzed the impact of ICN on control plane signaling and user-plane | |||
data delivery. In general, ICN can be used natively by replacing IP | data delivery. In general, ICN can be used natively by replacing IP | |||
transport (IPv4 and IPv6) or as an overlay protocol. Figure 4 | transport (IPv4 and IPv6) or as an overlay protocol. Figure 4 | |||
describes a proposal to modify the existing transport protocol stack | describes a proposal to modify the existing transport protocol stack | |||
to support ICN in 4G mobile network. | to support ICN in a 4G mobile network. | |||
+----------------+ +-----------------+ | +----------------+ +-----------------+ | |||
| ICN App (new) | |IP App (existing)| | | ICN App (new) | |IP App (existing)| | |||
+---------+------+ +-------+---------+ | +---------+------+ +-------+---------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
+---------+----------------+---------+ | +---------+----------------+---------+ | |||
| Transport Convergence Layer (new) | | | Transport Convergence Layer (new) | | |||
+------+---------------------+-------+ | +------+---------------------+-------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
+------+------+ +------+-------+ | +------+------+ +------+-------+ | |||
skipping to change at page 15, line 39 ¶ | skipping to change at line 632 ¶ | |||
| (New) | | (Existing) | | | (New) | | (Existing) | | |||
+------+------+ +------+-------+ | +------+------+ +------+-------+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
(```). (```). | (```). (```). | |||
( ICN '`. ( IP '`. | ( ICN '`. ( IP '`. | |||
( Cloud ) ( Cloud ) | ( Cloud ) ( Cloud ) | |||
` __..'+' ` __..'+' | ` __..'+' ` __..'+' | |||
Figure 4: IP/ICN Convergence Scenarios | Figure 4: IP/ICN Convergence Scenarios | |||
As shown in Figure 4, for applications - running either in the mobile | As shown in Figure 4, for applications (running either in the mobile | |||
terminal or in the content provider system - to use the ICN transport | terminal or in the content provider system) to use the ICN transport | |||
option, we propose a new transport convergence layer (TCL). The TCL | option, we propose a new transport convergence layer (TCL). The TCL | |||
helps determine the type of transport (such as ICN or IP), as well as | helps determine the type of transport (such as ICN or IP) as well as | |||
the type of radio interface (LTE or WiFi or both) used to send and | the type of radio interface (LTE, Wi-Fi, or both) used to send and | |||
receive traffic based on preference (e.g., content location, content | receive traffic based on preference (e.g., content location, content | |||
type, content publisher, congestion, cost, QoS). It helps configure | type, content publisher, congestion, cost, or QoS). It helps | |||
and determine the type of connection (native IP or ICN) or the | configure and determine the type of connection (native IP or ICN) or | |||
overlay mode (ICNoIP or IPoICN) between application and the protocol | the overlay mode (ICNoIP or IPoICN) between application and the | |||
stack (IP or ICN). | protocol stack (IP or ICN). | |||
Combined with the existing IP function, the ICN function provides | Combined with the existing IP function, the ICN function provides | |||
support for either native ICN and/or the dual transport (ICN/IP) | support for native ICN and/or the dual transport (ICN/IP) | |||
transport functionality. See Section 5.4.1 for elaborate | functionality. See Section 5.4.1 for elaborate descriptions of these | |||
descriptions of these functional layers. | functional layers. | |||
The TCL can use several mechanisms for transport selection. It can | The TCL can use several mechanisms for transport selection. It can | |||
use a per-application configuration through a management interface, | use a per-application configuration through a management interface, | |||
possibly a user-facing setting realized through a user interface, | possibly a user-facing setting realized through a user interface, | |||
like those used to select cellular over WiFi. In another option, it | like those used to select cellular over Wi-Fi. In another option, it | |||
might use a software API, which an adapted IP application could use | might use a software API, which an adapted IP application could use | |||
to specify the type of transport option (such as ICN) to take | to specify the type of transport option (such as ICN) to take | |||
advantage of its benefits. | advantage of its benefits. | |||
Another potential application of TCL is in implementation of network | Another potential application of TCL is in an implementation of | |||
slicing, with a slice management capability locally or through an | network slicing with a local slice management capability or through | |||
interface to an external slice manager via an API [GALIS]. This | an interface to an external slice manager via an API [GALIS]. This | |||
solution can enable network slicing for IP and ICN transport | solution can enable network slicing for IP and ICN transport | |||
selection from the mobile terminal itself. The TCL could apply slice | selection from the mobile terminal itself. The TCL could apply slice | |||
settings to direct certain applications traffic over one slice and | settings to direct certain applications traffic over one slice and | |||
others over another slice, determined by some form of 'slicing | others over another slice, determined by some form of a 'slicing | |||
policy'. Slicing policy can be obtained externally from the slice | policy'. The slicing policy can be obtained externally from the | |||
manager or configured locally on the mobile terminal. | slice manager or configured locally on the mobile terminal. | |||
From the perspective of applications either on the mobile terminal or | From the perspective of applications either on the mobile terminal or | |||
at a content provider, the following options are possible for | at a content provider, the following options are possible for | |||
potential use of ICN natively and/or with IP. | potential use of ICN natively and/or with IP. | |||
1. IP over IP | IP over IP (IPoIP): In this scenario, the mobile terminal | |||
applications are tightly integrated with the existing IP transport | ||||
In this scenario, the mobile terminal applications are tightly | infrastructure. The TCL has no additional function because | |||
integrated with the existing IP transport infrastructure. The | packets are forwarded directly using an IP protocol stack, which | |||
TCL has no additional function because packets are forwarded | sends packets over the IP transport. | |||
directly using an IP protocol stack, which sends packets over the | ||||
IP transport. | ||||
2. ICN over ICN | ||||
Similar to case 1, ICN applications tightly integrate with the | ||||
ICN transport infrastructure. The TCL has no additional | ||||
responsibility because packets are forwarded directly using the | ||||
native ICN protocol stack, which sends packets over the ICN | ||||
transport. | ||||
3. ICN over IP (ICNoIP) | ||||
In this scenario, the underlying IP transport infrastructure is | ||||
not impacted (that is, ICN is implemented as an IP overlay | ||||
between mobile terminal and content provider). IP routing is | ||||
used from the Radio Access Network (eNodeB) to the mobile | ||||
backhaul, the IP core, and the Mobile Gateway (SGW/PGW). The | ||||
mobile terminal attaches to the Mobile Gateway (SGW/PGW) using an | ||||
IP address. Also, the data transport between Mobile Gateway | ||||
(SGW/PGW) and content publisher uses IP. The content provider | ||||
can serve content either using IP or ICN, based on the mobile | ||||
terminal request. | ||||
One of the approaches to implement ICN in mobile backhaul | ICN over ICN (ICNoICN): Similar to case 1, ICN applications tightly | |||
networks is described in [MBICN]. It implements a GTP-U | integrate with the ICN transport infrastructure. The TCL has no | |||
extension header option to encapsulate ICN payload in a GTP | additional responsibility because packets are forwarded directly | |||
tunnel. However, as this design runs ICN as an IP overlay, the | using the native ICN protocol stack, which sends packets over the | |||
mobile backhaul can be deployed using native IP. The proposal | ICN transport. | |||
describes a mechanism where the GTP-U tunnel can be terminated by | ||||
hairpinning the packet before it reaches SGW, if an ICN-enabled | ||||
node is deployed in the mobile backhaul (that is, between eNodeB | ||||
and SGW). This could be useful when an ICN data packet is stored | ||||
in the ICN node (such as repositories, caches) in the tunnel path | ||||
so that the ICN node can reply without going all the way through | ||||
the mobile core. While a GTP-U extension header is used to carry | ||||
mobile terminal specific ICN payload, they are not visible to the | ||||
transport, including SGW. On the other hand, the PGW can use the | ||||
mobile terminal-specific ICN header extension and ICN payload to | ||||
set up an uplink transport towards a content provider in the | ||||
Internet. In addition, the design assumes a proxy function at | ||||
the edge, to perform ICN data retrieval on behalf of a non-ICN | ||||
end device. | ||||
4. IP over ICN (IPoICN) | ICN over IP (ICNoIP): In this scenario, the underlying IP transport | |||
infrastructure is not impacted (that is, ICN is implemented as an | ||||
IP overlay between mobile terminal and content provider). IP | ||||
routing is used from the Radio Access Network (eNodeB) to the | ||||
mobile backhaul, the IP core, and the Mobile Gateway (SGW/PGW). | ||||
The mobile terminal attaches to the Mobile Gateway (SGW/PGW) using | ||||
an IP address. Also, the data transport between Mobile Gateway | ||||
(SGW/PGW) and content publisher uses IP. The content provider can | ||||
serve content using either IP or ICN, based on the mobile terminal | ||||
request. | ||||
[IPoICN] provides an architectural framework for running IP as an | One of the approaches to implement ICN in mobile backhaul networks | |||
overlay over ICN protocol. Implementing IP services over ICN | is described in [MBICN]. It implements a General Tunneling | |||
provides an opportunity to leverage the benefits of ICN in the | Protocol - User Plane (GTP-U) extension header option to | |||
transport infrastructure while there is no impact on end devices | encapsulate ICN payload in a GTP tunnel. However, as this design | |||
(MT and access network) as they continue to use IP. IPoICN | runs ICN as an IP overlay, the mobile backhaul can be deployed | |||
however, will require an inter-working function (IWF/Border | using native IP. The proposal describes a mechanism where the | |||
Gateway) to translate various transport primitives. The IWF | GTP-U tunnel can be terminated by hairpinning the packet before it | |||
function will provide a mechanism for protocol translation | reaches the SGW if an ICN-enabled node is deployed in the mobile | |||
between IPoICN and the native IP. After reviewing [IPoICN], we | backhaul (that is, between eNodeB and SGW). This could be useful | |||
understand and interpret that ICN is implemented in the transport | when an ICN data packet is stored in the ICN node (such as | |||
natively, however, IP is implemented in MT, eNodeB, and Mobile | repositories and caches) in the tunnel path so that the ICN node | |||
gateway (SGW/PGW), which is also called as a network attach point | can reply without going all the way through the mobile core. | |||
(NAP). | While a GTP-U extension header is used to carry mobile-terminal- | |||
specific ICN payload, they are not visible to the transport, | ||||
including the SGW. On the other hand, the PGW can use the mobile | ||||
terminal-specific ICN header extension and ICN payload to set up | ||||
an uplink transport towards a content provider in the Internet. | ||||
In addition, the design assumes a proxy function at the edge to | ||||
perform ICN data retrieval on behalf of a non-ICN end device. | ||||
For this, said NAP receives an incoming IP or HTTP packet (the | IP over ICN (IPoICN): [IPoICN] provides an architectural framework | |||
latter through TCP connection termination) and publishes the | for running IP as an overlay over the ICN protocol. Implementing | |||
packet under a suitable ICN name (i.e., the hash over the | IP services over ICN provides an opportunity to leverage the | |||
destination IP address for an IP packet or the hash over the FQDN | benefits of ICN in the transport infrastructure while there is no | |||
of the HTTP request for an HTTP packet) to the ICN network. In | impact on end devices (MT and access network) as they continue to | |||
the HTTP case, the NAP maintains a pending request mapping table | use IP. IPoICN, however, will require an interworking function | |||
to map returning responses to the terminated TCP connection. | (IWF) (and Border Gateway) to translate various transport | |||
primitives. The IWF function will provide a mechanism for | ||||
protocol translation between IPoICN and the native IP. After | ||||
reviewing [IPoICN], we understand and interpret that ICN is | ||||
implemented in the transport natively; however, IP is implemented | ||||
in MT, the eNodeB, and the Mobile Gateway (SGW/PGW), which is also | ||||
called a network attach point (NAP). | ||||
5. Hybrid ICN (hICN) | For this, said NAP receives an incoming IP or HTTP packet (the | |||
latter through TCP connection termination) and publishes the | ||||
packet under a suitable ICN name (i.e., the hash over the | ||||
destination IP address for an IP packet or the hash over the FQDN | ||||
of the HTTP request for an HTTP packet) to the ICN network. In | ||||
the HTTP case, the NAP maintains a pending request mapping table | ||||
to map returning responses to the terminated TCP connection. | ||||
An alternative approach to implement ICN over IP is provided in | Hybrid ICN (hICN): An alternative approach to implement ICN over IP | |||
Hybrid ICN [HICN]. It describes a novel approach to integrate | is provided in Hybrid ICN [HICN]. It describes a novel approach | |||
ICN into IPv6 without creating overlays with a new packet format | to integrate ICN into IPv6 without creating overlays with a new | |||
as an encapsulation. hICN addresses the content by encoding a | packet format as an encapsulation. hICN addresses the content by | |||
location-independent name in an IPv6 address. It uses two name | encoding a location-independent name in an IPv6 address. It uses | |||
components--name prefix and name suffix--that identify the source | two name components, name prefix and name suffix, that identify | |||
of data and the data segment within the scope of the name prefix, | the source of data and the data segment within the scope of the | |||
respectively. | name prefix, respectively. | |||
At application layer, hICN maps the name into an IPv6 prefix and, | At the application layer, hICN maps the name into an IPv6 prefix | |||
thus, uses IP as transport. As long as the name prefixes, which | and, thus, uses IP as transport. As long as the name prefixes, | |||
are routable IP prefixes, point towards a mobile GW (PGW or local | which are routable IP prefixes, point towards a mobile GW (PGW or | |||
breakout, such as CUPS), there are potentially no updates | local breakout, such as CUPS), there are potentially no updates | |||
required to any of the mobile core gateways (for example, SGW/ | required to any of the mobile core gateways (for example, SGW/ | |||
PGW). The IPv6 backhaul routes the packets within the mobile | PGW). The IPv6 backhaul routes the packets within the mobile | |||
core. hICN can run in the mobile terminal, in the eNodeB, in the | core. hICN can run in the mobile terminal, the eNodeB, the mobile | |||
mobile backhaul, or in the mobile core. Finally, as hICN itself | backhaul, or the mobile core. Finally, as hICN itself uses IPv6, | |||
uses IPv6, it cannot be considered as an alternative transport | it cannot be considered as an alternative transport layer. | |||
layer. | ||||
5.3. Integration of ICN in 4G Control Plane | 5.3. Integration of ICN in 4G Control Plane | |||
In this section, we analyze signaling messages that are required for | In this section, we analyze signaling messages that are required for | |||
different procedures, such as attach, handover, tracking area update, | different procedures, such as attach, handover, tracking area update, | |||
and so on. The goal of this analysis is to see if there are any | and so on. The goal of this analysis is to see if there are any | |||
benefits to replacing IP-based protocols with ICN for 4G signaling in | benefits to replacing IP-based protocols with ICN for 4G signaling in | |||
the current architecture. It is important to understand the concept | the current architecture. It is important to understand the concept | |||
of point of attachment (POA). When mobile terminal connects to a | of point of attachment (POA). When a mobile terminal connects to a | |||
network, it has the following POAs: | network, it has the following POAs: | |||
1. eNodeB managing location or physical POA | 1. eNodeB managing location or physical POA | |||
2. Authentication and Authorization (MME, HSS) managing identity or | 2. Authentication and Authorization (MME, HSS) managing identity or | |||
authentication POA | authentication POA | |||
3. Mobile Gateways (SGW, PGW) managing logical or session management | 3. Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW) managing logical or session management | |||
POA | POA | |||
In the current architecture, IP transport is used for all messages | In the current architecture, IP transport is used for all messages | |||
associated with the control plane for mobility and session | associated with the control plane for mobility and session | |||
management. IP is embedded very deeply into these messages utilizing | management. IP is embedded very deeply into these messages utilizing | |||
TLV syntax for carrying additional attributes such as a layer 3 | TLV syntax for carrying additional attributes such as a Layer 3 | |||
transport. The physical POA in the eNodeB handles both mobility and | transport. The physical POA in the eNodeB handles both mobility and | |||
session management for any mobile terminal attached to 4G network. | session management for any mobile terminal attached to a 4G network. | |||
The number of mobility management messages between different nodes in | The number of mobility management messages between different nodes in | |||
an 4G network per signaling procedure is shown in Table 1. | a 4G network per the signaling procedure is shown in Table 1. | |||
Normally, two types of mobile terminals attach to the 4G network: SIM | Normally, two types of mobile terminals attach to the 4G network: SIM | |||
based (need 3GPP mobility protocol for authentication) or non-SIM | based (which needs a 3GPP mobility protocol for authentication) or | |||
based (which connect to WiFi network). Both device types require | non-SIM based (which connects to Wi-Fi networks). Both device types | |||
authentication. For non-SIM based devices, AAA is used for | require authentication. For non-SIM based devices, Authentication, | |||
authentication. We do not propose to change mobile terminal | Authorization, and Accounting (AAA) is used for authentication. We | |||
authentication or mobility management messaging for user data | do not propose to change mobile terminal authentication or mobility | |||
transport using ICN. A separate study would be required to analyze | management messaging for user data transport using ICN. A separate | |||
the impact of ICN on mobility management messages structures and | study would be required to analyze the impact of ICN on mobility | |||
flows. We are merely analyzing the viability of implementing ICN as | management messages, structures, and flows. We are merely analyzing | |||
a transport for control plane messages. | the viability of implementing ICN as a transport for control plane | |||
messages. | ||||
It is important to note that if MME and HSS do not support ICN | It is important to note that if MME and HSS do not support ICN | |||
transport, they still need to support mobile terminal capable of dual | transport, they still need to support a mobile terminal capable of | |||
transport or native ICN. When mobile terminal initiates an attach | dual transport or native ICN. When a mobile terminal initiates an | |||
request using the identity as ICN, MME must be able to parse that | attach request using the identity as ICN, MME must be able to parse | |||
message and create a session. MME forwards mobile terminal | that message and create a session. MME forwards mobile terminal | |||
authentication to HSS, so HSS must be able to authenticate an ICN- | authentication to HSS, so HSS must be able to authenticate an ICN- | |||
capable mobile terminal and authorize create session [TS23.401]. | capable mobile terminal and authorize Create Session [TS23.401]. | |||
+===========================+=====+=====+=====+=====+======+ | +===========================+=====+=====+=====+=====+======+ | |||
| 4G Signaling Procedures | MME | HSS | SGW | PGW | PCRF | | | 4G Signaling Procedures | MME | HSS | SGW | PGW | PCRF | | |||
+===========================+=====+=====+=====+=====+======+ | +===========================+=====+=====+=====+=====+======+ | |||
| Attach | 10 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | Attach | 10 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | |||
+---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | +---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | |||
| Additional default bearer | 4 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | | Additional default bearer | 4 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | | |||
+---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | +---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | |||
| Dedicated bearer | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | | | Dedicated bearer | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | | |||
+---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | +---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | |||
skipping to change at page 20, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at line 825 ¶ | |||
+---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | +---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | |||
| S1 handover | 8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | | | S1 handover | 8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | | |||
+---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | +---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | |||
| Tracking area update | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | | Tracking area update | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | |||
+---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | +---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | |||
| Total | 34 | 2 | 14 | 6 | 3 | | | Total | 34 | 2 | 14 | 6 | 3 | | |||
+---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | +---------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+ | |||
Table 1: Signaling Messages in 4G Gateways | Table 1: Signaling Messages in 4G Gateways | |||
Anchorless mobility [ALM] provides a fully decentralized, control- | Anchorless mobility [ALM] provides a fully decentralized solution | |||
plane agnostic solution to handle producer mobility in ICN. Mobility | that is control plane agnostic to handle producer mobility in ICN. | |||
management at layer-3 level makes it access agnostic and transparent | Mobility management at the Layer 3 makes its access agnostic and | |||
to the end device or the application. The solution discusses | transparent to the end device or the application. The solution | |||
handling mobility without having to depend on core network functions | discusses handling mobility without having to depend on core network | |||
(e.g. MME); however, a location update to the core network may still | functions (e.g., MME); however, a location update to the core network | |||
be required to support legal compliance requirements such as lawful | may still be required to support legal compliance requirements such | |||
intercept and emergency services. These aspects are open for further | as lawful intercept and emergency services. These aspects are open | |||
study. | for further study. | |||
One of the advantages of ICN is in the caching and reusing of the | One of the advantages of ICN is in the caching and reusing of the | |||
content, which does not apply to the transactional signaling | content, which does not apply to the transactional signaling | |||
exchange. After analyzing 4G signaling call flows [TS23.401] and | exchange. After analyzing 4G signaling call flows [TS23.401] and | |||
messages inter-dependencies (see Table 1), our recommendation is that | message interdependencies (see Table 1), our recommendation is that | |||
it is not beneficial to use ICN for control plane and mobility | it is not beneficial to use ICN for control plane and mobility | |||
management functions. Among the features of ICN design, Interest | management functions. Among the features of ICN design, Interest | |||
aggregation and content caching are not applicable to control plane | aggregation and content caching are not applicable to control plane | |||
signaling messages. Control plane messages are originated and | signaling messages. Control plane messages are originated and | |||
consumed by the applications and they cannot be shared. | consumed by the applications, and they cannot be shared. | |||
5.4. Integration of ICN in 4G User Plane | 5.4. Integration of ICN in 4G User Plane | |||
We will consider Figure 1 to discuss different mechanisms to | We will consider Figure 1 when discussing different mechanisms to | |||
integrate ICN in mobile networks. In Section 5.2, we discussed | integrate ICN in mobile networks. In Section 5.2, we discussed | |||
generic experimental setups of ICN integration. In this section, we | generic experimental setups of ICN integration. In this section, we | |||
discuss the specific options of possible use of native ICN in 4G user | discuss the specific options of possible use of native ICN in the 4G | |||
plane. We consider the following options: | user plane. The following options are considered: | |||
1. Dual transport (IP/ICN) mode in Mobile Terminal | 1. Using Dual transport (IP/ICN) mode in mobile terminal | |||
2. Using ICN in Mobile Terminal | 2. Using ICN in mobile terminal | |||
3. Using ICN in eNodeB | 3. Using ICN in eNodeB | |||
4. Using ICN in mobile gateways (SGW/PGW) | 4. Using ICN in Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW) | |||
5.4.1. Dual Transport (IP/ICN) Mode in Mobile Terminal | 5.4.1. Dual Transport (IP/ICN) Mode in Mobile Terminal | |||
The control and user plane communications in 4G mobile networks are | The control and user-plane communications in 4G mobile networks are | |||
specified in 3GPP documents [TS23.203] and [TS23.401]. It is | specified in 3GPP documents [TS23.203] and [TS23.401]. It is | |||
important to understand that mobile terminal can be either consumer | important to understand that a mobile terminal can be either consumer | |||
(receiving content) or publisher (pushing content for other clients). | (receiving content) or publisher (pushing content for other clients). | |||
The protocol stack inside the mobile terminal (MT) is complex because | The protocol stack inside the mobile terminal (MT) is complex because | |||
it must support multiple radio connectivity access to eNodeB(s). | it must support multiple radio connectivity access to eNodeB(s). | |||
Figure 5 provides a high-level description of a protocol stack, where | Figure 5 provides a high-level description of a protocol stack, where | |||
IP is used at two layers: (1) user plane communication and (2) UDP | IP is used at two layers: (1) user-plane communication and (2) UDP | |||
encapsulation. User plane communication takes place between Packet | encapsulation. User-plane communication takes place between the | |||
Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) and Application layer, whereas UDP | Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) and Application layer, | |||
encapsulation is at GTP protocol stack. | whereas UDP encapsulation is at the GTP protocol stack. | |||
The protocol interactions and impact of supporting tunneling of ICN | The protocol interactions and impact of supporting the tunneling of | |||
packet into IP or to support ICN natively are described in Figure 5 | an ICN packet into IP or supporting ICN natively are described in | |||
and Figure 6, respectively. | Figures 5 and 6, respectively. | |||
+--------+ +--------+ | +--------+ +--------+ | |||
| App | | CDN | | | App | | CDN | | |||
+--------+ +--------+ | +--------+ +--------+ | |||
|Transp. | | | | |Transp. | | |Transp. | | | | |Transp. | | |||
|Converg.|.|..............|...............|............|.|Converge| | |Converg.|.|..............|...............|............|.|Converge| | |||
+--------+ | | | +--------+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | | | +--------+ | +--------+ | |||
| |.|..............|...............|.| |.|.| | | | |.|..............|...............|.| |.|.| | | |||
| ICN/IP | | | | | ICN/IP | | | ICN/IP| | | ICN/IP | | | | | ICN/IP | | | ICN/IP| | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
+--------+ | +----+-----+ | +-----+-----+ | +-----+--+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | +----+-----+ | +-----+-----+ | +-----+--+ | +--------+ | |||
| |.|.| | |.|.| | |.|.| | | | | | | | |.|.| | |.|.| | |.|.| | | | | | | |||
| PDCP | | |PDCP|GTP-U| | |GTP-U|GTP-U| | |GTP-U| | | | L2 | | | PDCP | | |PDCP|GTP-U| | |GTP-U|GTP-U| | |GTP-U| | | | L2 | | |||
+--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +-----+ | | | | | +--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +-----+ | | | | | |||
| RLC |.|.|RLC | UDP |.|.| UDP | UDP |.|.|UDP |L2|.|.| | | | RLC |.|.|RLC | UDP |.|.| UDP | UDP |.|.|UDP |L2|.|.| | | |||
+--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +-----+ | | | | | +--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +-----+ | | | | | |||
| MAC |.|.| MAC| L2 |.|.| L2 | L2 |.|.| L2 | | | | | | | MAC |.|.| MAC| L2 |.|.| L2 | L2 |.|.| L2 | | | | | | |||
+--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | |||
| L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 |L1|.|.| L1 | | | L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 |L1|.|.| L1 | | |||
+--------+ | +----+-----+ | +-----+-----+ | +-----+--+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | +----+-----+ | +-----+-----+ | +-----+--+ | +--------+ | |||
MT | BS(eNodeB) | SGW | PGW | | MT | BS (eNodeB) | SGW | PGW | | |||
Uu S1U S5/S8 SGi | Uu S1U S5/S8 SGi | |||
Figure 5: Dual Transport (IP/ICN) mode in Mobile Terminal | Figure 5: Dual Transport (IP/ICN) Mode in a Mobile Terminal | |||
The protocols and software stack used inside 4G capable mobile | The protocols and software stack used inside 4G-capable mobile | |||
terminal support both 3G and 4G software interworking and handover. | terminals support both 3G and 4G software interworking and handover. | |||
3GPP Rel.13 onward specifications describe the use of IP and non-IP | 3GPP Rel.13 specifications and onward describe the use of IP and non- | |||
protocols to establish logical/session connectivity. We can leverage | IP protocols to establish logical/session connectivity. We can | |||
the non-IP protocol-based mechanism to deploy ICN protocol stack in | leverage the non-IP protocol-based mechanism to deploy an ICN | |||
the mobile terminal, as well as in eNodeB and mobile gateways (SGW, | protocol stack in the mobile terminal as well as in an eNodeB and | |||
PGW). The following paragraphs describe per-layer considerations of | Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW). The following paragraphs describe per- | |||
supporting tunneling of ICN packet into IP or to support ICN | layer considerations of supporting the tunneling of ICN packets into | |||
natively. | IP or supporting ICN natively. | |||
1. An existing application layer can be modified to provide options | 1. An existing application layer can be modified to provide options | |||
for a new ICN-based application and existing IP-based | for a new ICN-based application and existing IP-based | |||
applications. The mobile terminal can continue to support | applications. The mobile terminal can continue to support | |||
existing IP-based applications or can develop new applications to | existing IP-based applications or can develop new applications to | |||
support native ICN, ICNoIP, or IPoICN-based transport. The | support native ICN, ICNoIP, or IPoICN-based transport. The | |||
application layer can be provided with an option of selecting | application layer can be provided with an option of selecting | |||
either ICN or IP transport, as well as radio interface, to send | either ICN or IP transport, as well as radio interface, to send | |||
and receive data traffic. | and receive data traffic. | |||
Our proposal is to provide an Application Programming Interface | Our proposal is to provide an Application Programming Interface | |||
(API) to the application developers so they can choose either ICN | (API) to the application developers so they can choose either ICN | |||
or IP transport for exchanging the traffic with the network. As | or IP transport for exchanging the traffic with the network. As | |||
mentioned in Section 5.2, the transport convergence layer (TCL) | mentioned in Section 5.2, the TCL function handles the | |||
function handles the interaction of applications with multiple | interaction of applications with multiple transport options. | |||
transport options. | ||||
2. The transport convergence layer helps determine the type of | 2. The transport convergence layer helps determine the type of | |||
transport (such as ICN, hICN, or IP) and type of radio interface | transport (such as ICN, hICN, or IP) and type of radio interface | |||
(LTE or WiFi, or both) used to send and receive traffic. | (LTE, Wi-Fi, or both) used to send and receive traffic. The | |||
Application layer can make the decision to select a specific | application layer can make the decision to select a specific | |||
transport based on preference, such as content location, content | transport based on preference such as content location, content | |||
type, content publisher, congestion, cost, QoS, and so on. There | type, content publisher, congestion, cost, QoS, and so on. There | |||
can be an Application Programming Interface (API) to exchange | can be an API to exchange parameters required for transport | |||
parameters required for transport selection. Southbound | selection. Southbound interactions of the TCL will be either to | |||
interactions of Transport Convergence Layer (TCL) will be either | IP or to ICN at the network layer. | |||
to IP or ICN at the network layer. | ||||
When selecting the IPoICN mode, the TCL is responsible for | When selecting the IPoICN mode, the TCL is responsible for | |||
receiving an incoming IP or HTTP packet and publishing the packet | receiving an incoming IP or HTTP packet and publishing the packet | |||
to the ICN network under a suitable ICN name (that is, the hash | to the ICN network under a suitable ICN name (that is, the hash | |||
over the destination IP address for an IP packet, or the hash | over the destination IP address for an IP packet or the hash over | |||
over the FQDN of the HTTP request for an HTTP packet). | the FQDN of the HTTP request for an HTTP packet). | |||
In the HTTP case, the TCL can maintain a pending request mapping | In the HTTP case, the TCL can maintain a pending request mapping | |||
table to map returning responses to the originating HTTP request. | table to map, returning responses to the originating HTTP | |||
The common API will provide a 'connection' abstraction for this | request. The common API will provide a "connection" abstraction | |||
HTTP mode of operation, returning the response over said | for this HTTP mode of operation, returning the response over said | |||
connection abstraction, akin to the TCP socket interface, while | connection abstraction (akin to the TCP socket interface) while | |||
implementing a reliable transport connection semantic over the | implementing a reliable transport connection semantic over the | |||
ICN from the mobile terminal to the receiving mobile terminal or | ICN from the mobile terminal to the receiving mobile terminal or | |||
the PGW. If the HTTP protocol stack remains unchanged, therefore | the PGW. If the HTTP protocol stack remains unchanged, therefore | |||
utilizing the TCP protocol for transfer, the TCL operates in | utilizing the TCP protocol for transfer, the TCL operates in | |||
local TCP termination mode, retrieving the HTTP packet through | local TCP termination mode, retrieving the HTTP packet through | |||
said local termination. | said local termination. | |||
+----------------+ +-----------------+ | +----------------+ +-----------------+ | |||
| ICN App (new) | |IP App (existing)| | | ICN App (new) | |IP App (existing)| | |||
+---------+------+ +-------+---------+ | +---------+------+ +-------+---------+ | |||
skipping to change at page 23, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at line 990 ¶ | |||
+-----------------+------------------+ | +-----------------+------------------+ | |||
| | | | |||
+-----------------+------------------+ | +-----------------+------------------+ | |||
| Physical L1 (Existing) | | | Physical L1 (Existing) | | |||
+------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------------+ | |||
Figure 6: Dual Stack ICN Protocol Interactions | Figure 6: Dual Stack ICN Protocol Interactions | |||
3. The ICN function (forwarder) is proposed to run in parallel to | 3. The ICN function (forwarder) is proposed to run in parallel to | |||
the existing IP layer. The ICN forwarder forwards the ICN | the existing IP layer. The ICN forwarder forwards the ICN | |||
packets, such as an Interest packet to eNodeB or a response "data | packets such as an Interest packet to an eNodeB or a response | |||
packet" from eNodeB to the application. | "data packet" from an eNodeB to the application. | |||
4. For the dual-transport scenario, when mobile terminal is not | 4. For the dual-transport scenario, when a mobile terminal is not | |||
supporting ICN as transport, the TCL can use the IP underlay to | supporting ICN as transport, the TCL can use the IP underlay to | |||
tunnel the ICN packets. The ICN function can use the IP | tunnel the ICN packets. The ICN function can use the IP | |||
interface to send Interest and Data packets for fetching or | interface to send Interest and Data packets for fetching or | |||
sending data respectively. This interface can use the ICN | sending data, respectively. This interface can use the ICN | |||
overlay over IP. | overlay over IP. | |||
5. To support ICN at network layer in mobile terminal, the PDCP | 5. To support ICN at the network layer in the mobile terminal, the | |||
layer should be aware of ICN capabilities and parameters. PDCP | PDCP layer should be aware of ICN capabilities and parameters. | |||
is located in the Radio Protocol Stack in the LTE Air interface, | PDCP is located in the Radio Protocol Stack in the LTE Air | |||
between IP (Network layer) and Radio Link Control Layer (RLC). | interface, between the IP (Network layer) and Radio Link Control | |||
PDCP performs the following functions [TS36.323]: | Layer (RLC). PDCP performs the following functions [TS36.323]: | |||
1. Data transport by listening to upper layer, formatting and | 1. Data transport by listening to the upper layer, formatting, | |||
pushing down to Radio Link Layer (RLC) | and pushing down to the RLC | |||
2. Header compression and decompression using Robust Header | 2. Header compression and decompression using ROHC | |||
Compression (ROHC) | ||||
3. Security protections such as ciphering, deciphering, and | 3. Security protections such as ciphering, deciphering, and | |||
integrity protection | integrity protection | |||
4. Radio layer messages associated with sequencing, packet drop | 4. Radio layer messages associated with sequencing, packet drop | |||
detection and re-transmission, and so on. | detection and retransmission, and so on. | |||
6. No changes are required for lower layer such as RLC, MAC, and | 6. No changes are required for the lower layer such as RLC, Media | |||
Physical (L1) as they are not IP aware. | Access Control (MAC), and Physical (L1) as they are not IP aware. | |||
One key point to understand in this scenario is that ICN is deployed | One key point to understand in this scenario is that ICN is deployed | |||
as an overlay on top of IP. | as an overlay on top of IP. | |||
5.4.2. Using ICN in Mobile Terminal | 5.4.2. Using ICN in Mobile Terminal | |||
We can implement ICN natively in mobile terminal by modifying the | We can implement ICN natively in the mobile terminal by modifying the | |||
PDCP layer in 3GPP protocols. Figure 7 provides a high-level | PDCP layer in 3GPP protocols. Figure 7 provides a high-level | |||
protocol stack description where ICN can be used at the following | protocol stack description where ICN can be used at the following | |||
different layers: | different layers: | |||
1. User plane communication | 1. User-plane communication | |||
2. Transport layer | 2. Transport layer | |||
ICN transport would be a substitute of the GTP protocol. The removal | ICN transport would be a substitute for the GTP protocol. The | |||
of the GTP protocol stack is a significant change in the mobile | removal of the GTP protocol stack is a significant change in the | |||
architecture and requires a thorough study mainly because it is used | mobile architecture and requires a thorough study mainly because it | |||
not just for routing but for mobility management functions, such as | is used not just for routing but for mobility management functions | |||
billing, mediation, and policy enforcement. | such as billing, mediation, and policy enforcement. | |||
The implementation of ICN natively in the mobile terminal leads to a | The implementation of ICN natively in the mobile terminal leads to a | |||
changed communication model between mobile terminal and eNodeB. | changed communication model between the mobile terminal and eNodeB. | |||
Also, we can avoid tunneling the user plane traffic from eNodeB to | Also, we can avoid tunneling the user-plane traffic from an eNodeB to | |||
the mobile packet core (SGW, PGW) through a GTP tunnel. | the mobile packet core (SGW/PGW) through a GTP tunnel. | |||
For native ICN use, an application can be configured to use ICN | For native ICN use, an application can be configured to use an ICN | |||
forwarder and it does not need the TCL layer. Also, to support ICN | forwarder, and it does not need the TCL layer. Also, to support ICN | |||
at the network layer, the existing PDCP layer may need to be changed | at the network layer, the existing PDCP layer may need to be changed | |||
to be aware of ICN capabilities and parameters. | to be aware of ICN capabilities and parameters. | |||
The native implementation can provide new opportunities to develop | The native implementation can provide new opportunities to develop | |||
new use cases leveraging ICN capabilities, such as seamless mobility, | new use cases leveraging ICN capabilities such as seamless mobility, | |||
mobile terminal to mobile terminal content delivery using radio | mobile terminal to mobile terminal content delivery using a radio | |||
network without traversing the mobile gateways, and more. | network without traversing the Mobile Gateways, and more. | |||
+--------+ +--------+ | +--------+ +--------+ | |||
| App | | CDN | | | App | | CDN | | |||
+--------+ +--------+ | +--------+ +--------+ | |||
|Transp. | | | | | |Transp. | | |Transp. | | | | | |Transp. | | |||
|Converge|.|..............|..............|..............|.|Converge| | |Converge|.|..............|..............|..............|.|Converge| | |||
+--------+ | | | | +--------+ | +--------+ | | | | +--------+ | |||
| |.|..............|..............|..............|.| | | | |.|..............|..............|..............|.| | | |||
| ICN/IP | | | | | | | | | ICN/IP | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
skipping to change at page 25, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at line 1081 ¶ | |||
+--------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +--------+ | |||
| L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 |.|.| L1 |.|.| L1 | | | L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 |.|.| L1 |.|.| L1 | | |||
+--------+ | +----+-----+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +--------+ | +--------+ | +----+-----+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +--------+ | |||
MT | BS(eNodeB) | SGW | PGW | | MT | BS(eNodeB) | SGW | PGW | | |||
Uu S1u S5/S8 SGi | Uu S1u S5/S8 SGi | |||
Figure 7: Using Native ICN in Mobile Terminal | Figure 7: Using Native ICN in Mobile Terminal | |||
5.4.3. Using ICN in eNodeB | 5.4.3. Using ICN in eNodeB | |||
The eNodeB is a physical point of attachment for the mobile terminal, | The eNodeB is a physical point of attachment for the mobile terminal | |||
where radio protocols are converted into IP transport protocol for | where radio protocols are converted into IP transport protocols for | |||
dual transport/overlay and native ICN, respectively (see Figure 6 and | dual transport/overlay and native ICN, respectively (see Figures 6 | |||
Figure 7). When a mobile terminal performs an attach procedure, it | and 7). When a mobile terminal performs an attach procedure, it will | |||
would be assigned an identity either as IP or dual transport (IP and | be assigned an identity as either IP or dual transport (IP and ICN) | |||
ICN), or ICN endpoint. Mobile terminal can initiate data traffic | or ICN endpoint. A mobile terminal can initiate data traffic using | |||
using any of the following options: | any of the following options: | |||
1. Native IP (IPv4 or IPv6) | 1. Native IP (IPv4 or IPv6) | |||
2. Native ICN | 2. Native ICN | |||
3. Dual transport IP (IPv4/IPv6) and ICN | 3. Dual transport IP (IPv4/IPv6) and ICN | |||
The mobile terminal encapsulates a user data transport request into | The mobile terminal encapsulates a user data transport request into | |||
PDCP layer and sends the information on the air interface to eNodeB, | the PDCP layer and sends the information on the air interface to the | |||
which in turn receives the information and, using PDCP [TS36.323], | eNodeB, which in turn receives the information and, using PDCP | |||
de-encapsulates the air-interface messages and converts them to | [TS36.323], de-encapsulates the air-interface messages and converts | |||
forward to core mobile gateways (SGW, PGW). As shown in Figure 8, to | them to forward-to-core Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW). As shown in | |||
support ICN natively in eNodeB, it is proposed to provide transport | Figure 8, to support ICN natively in an eNodeB, it is proposed to | |||
convergence layer (TCL) capabilities in eNodeB (similar to as | provide TCL capabilities in an eNodeB (similar to as provided in MT), | |||
provided in MT), which provides the following functions: | which provides the following functions: | |||
1. It decides the forwarding strategy for a user data request coming | 1. It decides the forwarding strategy for a user data request coming | |||
from mobile terminal. The strategy can decide based on | from the mobile terminal. The strategy can decide based on | |||
preference indicated by the application, such as congestion, | preference indicated by the application, such as congestion, | |||
cost, QoS, and so on. | cost, QoS, and so on. | |||
2. eNodeB to provide open Application Programming Interface (API) to | 2. It uses an eNodeB to provide an open API to external management | |||
external management systems, to provide capability to eNodeB to | systems in order to provide eNodeB the capability to program the | |||
program the forwarding strategies. | forwarding strategies. | |||
+---------------+ | | +---------------+ | | |||
| MT request | | ICN +---------+ | | MT request | | ICN +---------+ | |||
+---->| content using |--+--- transport -->| | | +---->| content using |--+--- transport -->| | | |||
| |ICN protocol | | | | | | |ICN protocol | | | | | |||
| +---------------+ | | | | | +---------------+ | | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| +---------------+ | | | | | +---------------+ | | | | |||
+-+ | | MT request | | IP |To mobile| | +-+ | | MT request | | IP |To mobile| | |||
| |-+---->| content using |--+--- transport -->| GW | | | |-+---->| content using |--+--- transport -->| GW | | |||
+-+ | | IP protocol | | |(SGW,PGW)| | +-+ | | IP protocol | | |(SGW/PGW)| | |||
MT | +---------------+ | | | | MT | +---------------+ | | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| +---------------+ | | | | | +---------------+ | | | | |||
| | MT request | | Dual stack | | | | | MT request | | Dual stack | | | |||
+---->| content using |--+--- IP+ICN -->| | | +---->| content using |--+--- IP+ICN -->| | | |||
|IP/ICN protocol| | transport +---------+ | |IP/ICN protocol| | transport +---------+ | |||
+---------------+ | | +---------------+ | | |||
eNodeB S1u | eNodeB S1u | |||
Figure 8: Integration of Native ICN in eNodeB | Figure 8: Integration of Native ICN in eNodeB | |||
3. eNodeB can be upgraded to support three different types of | 3. The eNodeB can be upgraded to support three different types of | |||
transport: IP, ICN, and dual transport IP+ICN towards mobile | transport: IP, ICN, and dual transport IP+ICN towards Mobile | |||
gateways, as depicted in Figure 8. It is also proposed to deploy | Gateways, as depicted in Figure 8. It is also proposed to deploy | |||
IP and/or ICN forwarding capabilities into eNodeB, for efficient | IP and/or ICN forwarding capabilities into an eNodeB for | |||
transfer of data between eNodeB and mobile gateways. Following | efficient transfer of data between the eNodeB and Mobile | |||
are choices for forwarding a data request towards mobile | Gateways. The following are choices for forwarding a data | |||
gateways: | request towards Mobile Gateways: | |||
1. Assuming eNodeB is IP enabled and the MT requests an IP | 1. Assuming the eNodeB is IP enabled and the MT requests an IP | |||
transfer, eNodeB forwards data over IP. | transfer, the eNodeB forwards data over IP. | |||
2. Assuming eNodeB is ICN enabled and the MT requests an ICN | 2. Assuming the eNodeB is ICN enabled and the MT requests an ICN | |||
transfer, eNodeB forwards data over ICN. | transfer, the eNodeB forwards data over ICN. | |||
3. Assuming eNodeB is IP enabled and the MT requests an ICN | 3. Assuming the eNodeB is IP enabled and the MT requests an ICN | |||
transfer, eNodeB overlays ICN on IP and forwards user plane | transfer, the eNodeB overlays ICN on IP and forwards user- | |||
traffic over IP. | plane traffic over IP. | |||
4. Assuming eNodeB is ICN enabled and the MT requests an IP | 4. Assuming the eNodeB is ICN enabled and the MT requests an IP | |||
transfer, eNodeB overlays IP on ICN and forwards user plane | transfer, the eNodeB overlays IP on ICN and forwards user- | |||
traffic over ICN [IPoICN]. | plane traffic over ICN [IPoICN]. | |||
5.4.4. Using ICN in Packet Core (SGW, PGW) Gateways | 5.4.4. Using ICN in Packet Core Gateways (SGW/PGW) | |||
Mobile gateways (a.k.a. Evolved Packet Core (EPC)) include SGW, PGW, | Mobile Gateways (a.k.a. Evolved Packet Core (EPC)) include SGW and | |||
which perform session management for MT from the initial attach to | PGW, which perform session management for MT from the initial attach | |||
disconnection. When MT is powered on, it performs NAS signaling and | to disconnection. When MT is powered on, it performs Network-Access- | |||
attaches to PGW after successful authentication. PGW is an anchoring | Stratum (NAS) signaling and attaches to PGW after successful | |||
point for MT and responsible for service creations, authorization, | authentication. PGW is an anchoring point for MT and is responsible | |||
maintenance, and so on. The Entire functionality is managed using IP | for service creations, authorization, maintenance, and so on. The | |||
address(es) for MT. | entire functionality is managed using an IP address(es) for MT. | |||
To implement ICN in EPC, the following functions are proposed: | To implement ICN in EPC, the following functions are proposed: | |||
1. Insert ICN attributes in session management layer as additional | 1. Insert ICN attributes in the session management layer for | |||
functionality with IP stack. Session management layer is used | additional functionality with IP stack. The session management | |||
for performing attach procedures and assigning logical identity | layer is used for performing attach procedures and assigning | |||
to user. After successful authentication by HSS, MME sends a | logical identity to users. After successful authentication by | |||
create session request (CSR) to SGW and SGW to PGW. | HSS, MME sends a Create Session Request (CSR) to SGW and SGW to | |||
PGW. | ||||
2. When MME sends Create Session Request message (Step 12 in | 2. When MME sends a Create Session Request message (Step 12 in | |||
[TS23.401]) to SGW or PGW, it includes a Protocol Configuration | [TS23.401]) to SGW or PGW, it includes a Protocol Configuration | |||
Option Information Element (PCO IE) containing MT capabilities. | Option (PCO) Information Element (IE) containing MT capabilities. | |||
We can use PCO IE to carry ICN-related capabilities information | We can use PCO IE to carry ICN-related capabilities information | |||
from MT to PGW. This information is received from MT during the | from MT to PGW. This information is received from MT during the | |||
initial attach request in MME. Details of available TLV, which | initial attach request in MME. Details of available TLV, which | |||
can be used for ICN, are given in subsequent sections. MT can | can be used for ICN, are given in subsequent sections. MT can | |||
support either native IP, ICN+IP, or native ICN. IP is referred | support native IP, ICN+IP, or native ICN. IP is referred to as | |||
to as both IPv4 and IPv6 protocols. | both IPv4 and IPv6 protocols. | |||
3. For ICN+IP-capable MT, PGW assigns the MT both an IP address and | 3. For ICN+IP-capable MT, PGW assigns the MT both an IP address and | |||
ICN identity. MT selects either of the identities during the | ICN identity. MT selects either of the identities during the | |||
initial attach procedures and registers with the network for | initial attach procedures and registers with the network for | |||
session management. For ICN-capable MT, it will provide only ICN | session management. For ICN-capable MT, it will provide only ICN | |||
attachment. For native IP-capable MT, there is no change. | attachment. For native IP-capable MT, there is no change. | |||
4. To support ICN-capable attach procedures and use ICN for user | 4. To support ICN-capable attach procedures and use ICN for user- | |||
plane traffic, PGW needs to have full ICN protocol stack | plane traffic, PGW needs to have full ICN protocol stack | |||
functionalities. Typical ICN capabilities include functions such | functionalities. Typical ICN capabilities include functions such | |||
as content store (CS), Pending Interest Table (PIT), Forwarding | as CS, PIT, FIB capabilities, and so on. If MT requests ICN in | |||
Information Base (FIB) capabilities, and so on. If MT requests | PCO IE, then PGW registers MT with ICN names. For ICN | |||
ICN in PCO IE, then PGW registers MT with ICN names. For ICN | ||||
forwarding, PGW caches content locally using CS functionality. | forwarding, PGW caches content locally using CS functionality. | |||
5. PCO IE described in [TS24.008] (see Figure 10.5.136 on page 598) | 5. PCO IE as described in [TS24.008] (see Figure 10.5.136 on page | |||
and [TS24.008] (see Table 10.5.154 on page 599) provide details | 656 and Table 10.5.154 on page 659) provides details for | |||
for different fields. | different fields. | |||
1. Octet 3 (configuration protocols define PDN types), which | 1. Octet 3 (configuration protocols define PDN types), which | |||
contains details about IPv4, IPv6, both or ICN. | contains details about IPv4, IPv6, both IPv4 and IPv6, or | |||
ICN. | ||||
2. Any combination of Octet 4 to Z can be used to provide | 2. Any combination of Octet 4 to Z can be used to provide | |||
additional information related to ICN capability. It is most | additional information related to ICN capability. It is most | |||
important that PCO IE parameters are matched between MT and | important that PCO IE parameters are matched between MT and | |||
mobile gateways (SGW, PGW) so they can be interpreted | Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW) so they can be interpreted properly | |||
properly and the MT can attach successfully. | and the MT can attach successfully. | |||
6. The ICN functionalities in SGW and PGW should be matched with MT | 6. The ICN functionalities in SGW and PGW should be matched with MT | |||
and eNodeB because they will exchange ICN protocols and | and the eNodeB because they will exchange ICN protocols and | |||
parameters. | parameters. | |||
7. Mobile gateways SGW, PGW will also need ICN forwarding and | 7. Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW) will also need ICN forwarding and | |||
caching capability. This is especially important if CUPS is | caching capability. This is especially important if CUPS is | |||
implemented. User Plane Function (UPF), comprising the SGW and | implemented. User Plane Function (UPF), comprising the SGW and | |||
PGW user plane, will be located at the edge of the network and | PGW user plane, will be located at the edge of the network and | |||
close to the end user. ICN-enabled gateway means that this UPF | close to the end user. ICN-enabled gateway means that this UPF | |||
would serve as a forwarder and should be capable of caching, as | would serve as a forwarder and should be capable of caching, as | |||
is the case with any other ICN-enabled node. | is the case with any other ICN-enabled node. | |||
8. The transport between PGW and CDN provider can be either IP or | 8. The transport between PGW and CDN provider can be either IP or | |||
ICN. When MT is attached to PGW with ICN identity and | ICN. When MT is attached to PGW with ICN identity and | |||
communicates with an ICN-enabled CDN provider, it will use ICN | communicates with an ICN-enabled CDN provider, it will use ICN | |||
primitives to fetch the data. On the other hand, for a MT | primitives to fetch the data. On the other hand, for an MT | |||
attached with an ICN identity, if PGW must communicate with an IP | attached with an ICN identity, if PGW must communicate with an | |||
enabled CDN provider, it will have to use an ICN-IP interworking | IP-enabled CDN provider, it will have to use an ICN-IP | |||
gateway to perform conversion between ICN and IP primitives for | interworking gateway to perform conversion between ICN and IP | |||
data retrieval. In the case of CUPS implementation with an | primitives for data retrieval. In the case of CUPS | |||
offload close to the edge, this interworking gateway can be | implementation with an offload close to the edge, this | |||
collocated with the UPF at the offload site to maximize the path | interworking gateway can be collocated with the UPF at the | |||
optimization. Further study is required to understand how this | offload site to maximize the path optimization. Further study is | |||
ICN-to-IP (and vice versa) interworking gateway would function. | required to understand how this ICN-to-IP (and vice versa) | |||
interworking gateway would function. | ||||
5.5. An Experimental Test Setup | 5.5. An Experimental Test Setup | |||
This section proposes an experimental lab setup and discusses the | This section proposes an experimental lab setup and discusses the | |||
open issues and questions that use of ICN protocol is intended to | open issues and questions that use of the ICN protocol is intended to | |||
address. To further test the modifications proposed in different | address. To further test the modifications proposed in different | |||
scenarios, a simple lab can be set up, as shown in Figure 9. | scenarios, a simple lab can be set up, as shown in Figure 9. | |||
+------------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------------------+ | |||
| +-----+ +------+ (```). +------+ | (````). +-----+ | | +-----+ +------+ (```). +------+ | (````). +-----+ | |||
| | SUB |-->| EMU |--(x-haul'.-->| EPC |--->( PDN ).-->| CDN | | | | SUB |-->| EMU |--(x-haul'.-->| EPC |--->( PDN ).-->| CDN | | |||
| +-----+ +------+ `__..'' +------+ | `__...' +-----+ | | +-----+ +------+ `__..'' +------+ | `__...' +-----+ | |||
+------------------------------------------+ | +------------------------------------------+ | |||
4G Mobile Network Functions | 4G Mobile Network Functions | |||
Figure 9: Native ICN Deployment Lab Setup | Figure 9: Native ICN Deployment Lab Setup | |||
The following test scenarios can be set up with VM-based deployment: | The following test scenarios can be set up with deployment based on | |||
Virtual Machine (VM): | ||||
1. SUB: ICN simulated client (using ndnSIM), a client application on | 1. SUB: An ICN-simulated client (using ndnSIM) - a client | |||
workstation requesting content. | application on a workstation requesting content. | |||
2. EMU: test unit emulating eNodeB. This will be a test node | 2. EMU: Test unit emulating an eNodeB. This is a test node allowing | |||
allowing for UE attachment and routing traffic subsequently from | for UE attachment and routing traffic subsequently from the | |||
the Subscriber to the Publisher. | Subscriber to the Publisher. | |||
3. EPC: Evolved Packet Core in a single instance (such as 5GOpenCore | 3. EPC: Evolved Packet Core in a single instance (such as Open5GCore | |||
[Open5GCore]). | [Open5GCore]). | |||
4. CDN: content delivery by a Publisher server. | 4. CDN: Content delivery by a Publisher server. | |||
For the purpose of this testing, ICN emulating code can be inserted | For the purpose of this testing, ICN-emulating code can be inserted | |||
in the test code in EMU to emulate ICN-capable eNodeB. An example of | in the test code in EMU to emulate an ICN-capable eNodeB. An example | |||
the code to be used is NS3 in its LTE model. Effect of such traffic | of the code to be used is NS3 in its LTE model. The effect of such | |||
on EPC and CDN can be observed and documented. In a subsequent | traffic on EPC and CDN can be observed and documented. In a | |||
phase, EPC code supporting ICN can be tested when available. | subsequent phase, EPC code supporting ICN can be tested when | |||
available. | ||||
Another option is to simulate the UE/eNodeB and EPC functions using | Another option is to simulate the UE/eNodeB and EPC functions using | |||
NS3's LTE [NS3LTE] and EPC [NS3EPC] models respectively. LTE model | NS3's LTE [NS3LTE] and EPC [NS3EPC] models, respectively. The LTE | |||
includes the LTE Radio Protocol stack, which resides entirely within | model includes the LTE Radio Protocol stack, which resides entirely | |||
the UE and the eNodeB nodes. This capability provides the simulation | within the UE and the eNodeB nodes. This capability provides the | |||
of UE and eNodeB deployment use cases. Similarly, EPC model includes | simulation of UE and eNodeB deployment use cases. Similarly, the EPC | |||
core network interfaces, protocols, and entities, which reside within | model includes core network interfaces, protocols, and entities, | |||
the SGW, PGW and MME nodes, and partially within the eNodeB nodes. | which reside within the Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW), and MME nodes and | |||
partially within the eNodeB nodes. | ||||
Even with its current limitations (such as IPv4 only, lack of | Even with its current limitations (such as IPv4 only, lack of | |||
integration with ndnSIM, no support for UE idle state), LTE | integration with ndnSIM, and no support for UE idle state), LTE | |||
simulation may be a very useful tool. In any case, both control and | simulation may be a very useful tool. In any case, both control and | |||
user plane traffic should be tested independently according to the | user-plane traffic should be tested independently according to the | |||
deployment model discussed in Section 5.4. | deployment model discussed in Section 5.4. | |||
6. Expected Outcomes from Experimentation | 6. Expected Outcomes from Experimentation | |||
The experimentations explained in Section 5 can be categorized in | The experimentation explained in Section 5 can be categorized in | |||
three broader scopes as follows. Note that, a further research and | three broader scopes as follows. Note that further research and | |||
study is required to fully understand and document the impact. | study is required to fully understand and document the impact. | |||
1. Architecture scope: to study the aspect of use of ICN at user | Architecture scope: to study the aspect of use of ICN at the user | |||
plane to reduce the complexities in current transport protocols, | plane to reduce the complexities in current transport protocols | |||
while also evaluating its use in the control plane. | while also evaluating its use in the control plane. | |||
2. Performance scope: to evaluate the gains through multicast, | Performance scope: to evaluate the gains through multicast, caching, | |||
caching, and other ICN features. | and other ICN features. | |||
3. Deployment scope: to check the viability of the ICN inclusion in | Deployment scope: to check the viability of ICN inclusion in the | |||
3GPP protocol stack and its viability in real-world deployments. | 3GPP protocol stack and in real-world deployments. | |||
6.1. Feeding into ICN Research | 6.1. Feeding into ICN Research | |||
Specifically, we have identified the following open questions, from | Specifically, we have identified the following open questions, from | |||
the architectural and performance perspective, that the proposed | the architectural and performance perspective, that the proposed | |||
experiments with ICN implementation scenarios in 4G mobile networks | experiments with ICN implementation scenarios in 4G mobile networks | |||
could address in further research: | could address in further research: | |||
1. Efficiency gains in terms of the amount of traffic in multicast | 1. Efficiency gains in terms of the amount of traffic in multicast | |||
scenarios (i.e., quantify the possible gains along different use | scenarios (i.e., quantify the possible gains along different use | |||
cases) and the efficiency gained in terms of latency for cached | cases) and latency for cached content, mainly in the CDN use | |||
content, mainly in the CDN use case. | case. | |||
2. How the new transport would coexist or replace the legacy | 2. How the new transport would coexist or replace the legacy | |||
transport protocols (e.g., IPv4, IPv6, MPLS, RSVP, etc.) and | transport protocols (e.g., IPv4, IPv6, MPLS, RSVP, etc.) and | |||
related services (e.g., bandwidth management, QoS handling, | related services (e.g., bandwidth management, QoS handling, | |||
etc.). | etc.). | |||
3. To what extent the simplification in the IP-based transport | 3. To what extent the simplification in the IP-based transport | |||
protocols will be achieved. The multiple overlays (e.g., the | protocols will be achieved. The multiple overlays (e.g., the | |||
MPLS, VPN, VPLS, Ethernet VPN, etc.) of services in the current | MPLS, VPN, Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS), Ethernet VPN, | |||
IP-based transport adds to the complexity on top of basic IP | etc.) of services in the current IP-based transport adds to the | |||
transport. This makes the troubleshooting extremely challenging. | complexity on top of basic IP transport. This makes the | |||
troubleshooting extremely challenging. | ||||
4. How the new transport can become service-aware such that it | 4. How the new transport can become service aware such that it | |||
brings in more simplicity in the system. | brings in more simplicity in the system. | |||
5. Confirm how (in)adequate would be ICN implementation in control | 5. Confirm how (in)adequate ICN implementation would be in the | |||
plane (which this draft discourages). Given that the 5G system, | control plane (which this document discourages). Given that the | |||
as specified in [TS23.501] (Appendix G.4), encourages the use of | 5G system, as specified in [TS23.501] (Appendix G.4), encourages | |||
name-based routing in (5G) control plane for realizing the 5G- | the use of name-based routing in the (5G) control plane for | |||
specific service-based architecture for control plane services | realizing the 5G-specific service-based architecture for control | |||
(so-called network function service), it would be worthwhile to | plane services (so-called network function service), it would be | |||
investigate whether the 4G control plane would benefit similarly | worthwhile to investigate whether the 4G control plane would | |||
from such use or whether specific 4G architectural constraints | benefit similarly from such use or whether specific 4G | |||
would prevent ICN from providing any notable benefit. | architectural constraints would prevent ICN from providing any | |||
notable benefit. | ||||
6.2. Use of Results Beyond Research | 6.2. Use of Results Beyond Research | |||
With the experiments and their outcomes outlined in this draft, we | With the experiments and their outcomes outlined in this document, we | |||
believe that this technology is ready for a wider use and adoption, | believe that this technology is ready for a wider use and adoption, | |||
providing additional insights. Specifically, we expect to study the | providing additional insights. Specifically, we expect to study the | |||
following: | following: | |||
1. Viability of ICN inclusion in the 3GPP protocol stack, i.e., | 1. Viability of ICN inclusion in the 3GPP protocol stack, i.e., | |||
investigate how realistic it would be to modify the stack, | investigating how realistic it would be to modify the stack, | |||
considering the scenarios explained in Section 5.4, and complete | considering the scenarios explained in Section 5.4, and | |||
the user session without feature degradation? | completing the user session without feature degradation. | |||
2. Viability of utilizing solutions in greenfield deployments, i.e., | 2. Viability of utilizing solutions in greenfield deployments, i.e., | |||
deploying the ICN-based extensions and solutions proposed in this | deploying the ICN-based extensions and solutions proposed in this | |||
draft in greenfield 4G deployments in order to assess real-world | document in greenfield 4G deployments in order to assess real- | |||
benefits when doing so. | world benefits when doing so. | |||
7. Security and Privacy Considerations | 7. IANA Considerations | |||
This document has no IANA actions. | ||||
8. Security and Privacy Considerations | ||||
This section will cover some security and privacy considerations in | This section will cover some security and privacy considerations in | |||
mobile and 4G network because of introduction of ICN. | mobile and 4G networks because of the introduction of ICN. | |||
7.1. Security Considerations | 8.1. Security Considerations | |||
To ensure only authenticated mobile terminals are connected to the | To ensure only authenticated mobile terminals are connected to the | |||
network, 4G mobile network implements various security mechanisms. | network, 4G mobile networks implement various security mechanisms. | |||
From the perspective of using ICN in the user plane, it needs to take | From the perspective of using ICN in the user plane, the following | |||
care of the following security aspects: | security aspects need to be taken care of: | |||
1. MT authentication and authorization | 1. MT authentication and authorization | |||
2. Radio or air interface security | 2. Radio or air interface security | |||
3. Denial of service attacks on the mobile gateway, services either | 3. Denial-of-service attacks on the Mobile Gateway; services are | |||
by the MT or by external entities in the Internet | either by the MT or by external entities in the Internet | |||
4. Content poisoning either in transport or servers | 4. Content poisoning in either transport or servers | |||
5. Content cache pollution attacks | 5. Content cache pollution attacks | |||
6. Secure naming, routing, and forwarding | 6. Secure naming, routing, and forwarding | |||
7. Application security | 7. Application security | |||
Security over the LTE air interface is provided through cryptographic | Security over the LTE air interface is provided through cryptographic | |||
techniques. When MT is powered up, it performs a key exchange | techniques. When MT is powered up, it performs a key exchange | |||
between MT's USIM and HSS/Authentication Center using NAS messages, | between the MT's Universal Mobile Telecommunications System | |||
including ciphering and integrity protections between MT and MME. | Subscriber Identity Module (USIM) and HSS/Authentication Center using | |||
Details for secure MT authentication, key exchange, ciphering, and | NAS messages, including ciphering and integrity protections between | |||
integrity protections messages are given in the 3GPP call flow | MT and MME. Details for secure MT authentication, key exchange, | |||
[TS23.401]. With ICN we are modifying protocol stack for user plane | ciphering, and integrity protection messages are given in the 3GPP | |||
and not control plane. The NAS signaling is exchanged between MT and | call flow [TS23.401]. With ICN, we are modifying the protocol stack | |||
mobile gateways e.g. MME, using control plane, therefore there is no | for the user plane and not the control plane. The NAS signaling is | |||
adverse impact of ICN on MT. | exchanged between MT and Mobile Gateways, e.g., MME, using the | |||
control plane; therefore, there is no adverse impact of ICN on MT. | ||||
4G uses IP transport in its mobile backhaul (between eNodeB and core | 4G uses IP transport in its mobile backhaul (between an eNodeB and | |||
network). In case of provider-owned backhaul, service provider may | the core network). In case of provider-owned backhaul, the Service | |||
require implementing a security mechanism in the backhaul network. | Provider may require implementing a security mechanism in the | |||
The native IP transport continues to leverage security mechanism such | backhaul network. The native IP transport continues to leverage | |||
as Internet key exchange (IKE) and the IP security protocol (IPsec). | security mechanisms such as Internet Key Exchange (IKE) and the IP | |||
More details of mobile backhaul security are provided in 3GPP network | Security (IPsec) protocol. More details of mobile backhaul security | |||
security specifications [TS33.310] and [TS33.320]. When mobile | are provided in 3GPP network security specifications [TS33.310] and | |||
backhaul is upgraded to support dual transport (IP+ICN) or native | [TS33.320]. When a mobile backhaul is upgraded to support dual | |||
ICN, it is required to implement security techniques that are | transport (IP+ICN) or native ICN, it is required to implement | |||
deployed in the mobile backhaul. When ICN forwarding is enabled on | security techniques that are deployed in the mobile backhaul. When | |||
mobile transport routers, we need to deploy security practices based | ICN forwarding is enabled on mobile transport routers, we need to | |||
on [RFC7476] and [RFC7927]. | deploy security practices based on [RFC7476] and [RFC7927]. | |||
4G mobile gateways (SGW, PGW) perform some of key functions such as | 4G Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW) perform some key functions such as | |||
content based online/offline billing and accounting, deep packet | content-based online/offline billing and accounting, deep packet | |||
inspection (DPI), and lawful interception (LI). When ICN is deployed | inspection (DPI), and lawful interception (LI). When ICN is deployed | |||
in user plane , we need to integrate ICN security for sessions | in the user plane, we need to integrate ICN security for sessions | |||
between MT and gateway. If we encrypt user plane payload metadata | between MT and the gateway. If we encrypt user-plane payload | |||
then it might be difficult to perform routing based on contents and | metadata, then it might be difficult to perform routing based on | |||
it may not work because we need decryption keys at every forwarder to | contents and it may not work because we need decryption keys at every | |||
route the content. The content itself can be encrypted between | forwarder to route the content. The content itself can be encrypted | |||
publisher and consumer to ensure privacy. Only the user with right | between publisher and consumer to ensure privacy. Only the user with | |||
decryption key shall be able to access the content. We need further | the right decryption key shall be able to access the content. We | |||
research for ICN impact on LI, online/offline charging and | need further research for ICN impact on LI, online/offline charging, | |||
accounting. | and accounting. | |||
7.2. Privacy Considerations | 8.2. Privacy Considerations | |||
In 4G networks, two main privacy issues are [MUTHANA] | In 4G networks, there are two main privacy issues [MUTHANA]: | |||
1. User Identity Privacy Issues. The main privacy issue within the | 1. User Identity Privacy Issues. The main privacy issue within 4G | |||
4G is the exposure of the IMSI. The IMSI can be intercepted by | is the exposure of the International Mobile Subscriber Identity | |||
adversaries. Such attacks are commonly referred to as "IMSI | (IMSI). The IMSI can be intercepted by adversaries. Such | |||
catching". | attacks are commonly referred to as "IMSI catching". | |||
2. Location Privacy Issues. IMSI Catching is closely related to the | 2. Location Privacy Issues. IMSI catching is closely related to the | |||
issue of location privacy. Knowing IMSI of user allows the | issue of location privacy. Knowing the IMSI of a user allows the | |||
attacker to track the user's movements and create profile about | attacker to track the user's movements and create a profile about | |||
the user and thus breaches the user's location privacy. | the user and thus breach the user's location privacy. | |||
In any network, caching implies a trade-off between network | In any network, caching implies a trade-off between network | |||
efficiency and privacy. The activity of users is exposed to the | efficiency and privacy. The activity of users is exposed to the | |||
scrutiny of cache owners with whom they may not have any | scrutiny of cache owners with whom they may not have any | |||
relationship. By monitoring the cache transactions, an attacker | relationship. By monitoring the cache transactions, an attacker | |||
could obtain significant information related to the objects accessed, | could obtain significant information related to the objects accessed, | |||
topology and timing of the requests [RFC7945]. Privacy concerns are | topology, and timing of the requests [RFC7945]. Privacy concerns are | |||
amplified by the introduction of new network functions such as | amplified by the introduction of new network functions such as | |||
Information lookup and Network storage, and different forms of | information lookup and network storage, and different forms of | |||
communication [FOTIOU]. Privacy risks in ICN can be broadly divided | communication [FOTIOU]. Privacy risks in ICN can be broadly divided | |||
in the following categories [TOURANI]: | in the following categories [TOURANI]: | |||
1. Timing attack | 1. Timing attack | |||
2. Communication monitoring attack | 2. Communication monitoring attack | |||
3. Censorship and anonymity attack | 3. Censorship and anonymity attack | |||
4. Protocol attack | 4. Protocol attack | |||
5. Naming-signature privacy | 5. Naming-signature privacy | |||
Introduction of TCL effectively enables ICN at the application and/or | ||||
transport layer, depending on the scenario described in section 5. | ||||
Enabling ICN in 4G networks is expected to increase efficiency by | ||||
taking advantage of ICN's inherent characteristics. This approach | ||||
would potentially leave some of the above-mentioned privacy concerns | ||||
open as a consequence of using ICN transport and ICN inherent privacy | ||||
vulnerabilities. | ||||
1. IPoIP Section 5.2 would not be affected as TCL has no role in it | The introduction of TCL effectively enables ICN at the application | |||
and ICN does not apply | and/or transport layer depending on the scenario described in | |||
Section 5. Enabling ICN in 4G networks is expected to increase | ||||
efficiency by taking advantage of ICN's inherent characteristics. | ||||
This approach would potentially leave some of the above-mentioned | ||||
privacy concerns open as a consequence of using ICN transport and ICN | ||||
inherent privacy vulnerabilities. | ||||
2. ICNoICN scenario Section 5.2 has increased risk of a privacy | 1. IPoIP (Section 5.2) would not be affected as TCL has no role in | |||
attack, and that risk is applicable to ICN protocol in general | it, and ICN does not apply. | |||
rather than specifically to the 4G implementation. Since this | ||||
scenario describes communication over ICN transport, every | ||||
forwarder in the path could be a potential risk for privacy | ||||
attack | ||||
3. ICNoIP scenario Section 5.2 uses IP for transport, so the only | 2. The ICNoICN scenario (Section 5.2) has increased risk of a | |||
additional ICN-related potential privacy risk areas are the | privacy attack, and that risk is applicable to the ICN protocol | |||
in general rather than specifically to the 4G implementation. | ||||
Since this scenario describes communication over ICN transport, | ||||
every forwarder in the path could be a potential risk for a | ||||
privacy attack. | ||||
3. The ICNoIP scenario (Section 5.2) uses IP for transport, so the | ||||
only additional ICN-related potential privacy risk areas are the | ||||
endpoints (consumer and publisher) where, at the application | endpoints (consumer and publisher) where, at the application | |||
layer, content is being served | layer, content is being served. | |||
4. IPoICN scenario Section 5.2 could have potentially increased risk | 4. The IPoICN scenario (Section 5.2) could have potentially | |||
due to possible vulnerability of the forwarders in the path of | increased risk due to possible vulnerability of the forwarders in | |||
ICN transport | the path of ICN transport. | |||
Privacy issues already identified in 4G remain a concern if ICN is | Privacy issues already identified in 4G remain a concern if ICN is | |||
introduced in any of the scenarios described earlier and compound to | introduced in any of the scenarios described earlier and compounds to | |||
the new, ICN-related privacy issues. Many research papers have been | the new ICN-related privacy issues. Many research papers have been | |||
published proposing solutions to the privacy issues listed above. | published that propose solutions to the privacy issues listed above. | |||
For LTE-specific privacy issues, some of the proposed solutions | For LTE-specific privacy issues, some of the proposed solutions | |||
[MUTHANA] are IMSI encryption by a MT, mutual authentication, | [MUTHANA] are IMSI encryption by an MT; mutual authentication; | |||
concealing the real IMSI within a random bit stream of certain size | concealing the real IMSI within a random bit stream of certain size | |||
where only the subscriber and HSS could extract the respective IMSI, | where only the subscriber and HSS could extract the respective IMSI; | |||
IMSI replacement with a changing pseudonym that only the HSS server | IMSI replacement with a changing pseudonym that only the HSS server | |||
can map it the UE's IMSI, and others. Similarly, some of the | can map to the UE's IMSI; and others. Similarly, some of the | |||
proposed ICN-specific privacy concerns mitigation methods, applicable | proposed ICN-specific privacy concerns mitigation methods, applicable | |||
where ICN transport is introduced as specified earlier in this | where ICN transport is introduced as specified earlier in this | |||
section, include [FOTIOU]: | section, include the following [FOTIOU]: | |||
* Delay for the first, or first k interests on edge routers (timing | * Delay for the first, or first k, interests on edge routers (timing | |||
attack) | attack) | |||
* Creating a secure tunnel or clients flagging the requests as non- | * Creating a secure tunnel or clients flagging the requests as non- | |||
cacheable for privacy (communication monitoring attack) | cacheable for privacy (communication monitoring attack) | |||
* Encoding interest by mixing content and cover file or using | * Encoding interest by mixing the content and cover file or using a | |||
hierarchical DNS-based brokering model (censorship and anonymity | hierarchical DNS-based brokering model (censorship and anonymity | |||
attack) | attack) | |||
* Use of rate-limiting requests for a specific namespace (protocol | * Use of rate-limiting requests for a specific namespace (protocol | |||
attack) | attack) | |||
* Cryptographic content hash-based naming or digital identity in an | * Cryptographic content hash-based naming or digital identity in an | |||
overlay network (naming-signature privacy) | overlay network (naming-signature privacy) | |||
Further research in this area is needed. Detailed discussion of | Further research in this area is needed. Detailed discussion of | |||
privacy is beyond the scope of this document. | privacy is beyond the scope of this document. | |||
8. Summary | 9. Summary | |||
In this draft, we have discussed the 4G networks and the experimental | In this document, we have discussed 4G networks and the experimental | |||
setups to study the advantages of potential use of ICN for efficient | setups to study the advantages of the potential use of ICN for | |||
delivery of contents to mobile terminals. We have discussed | efficient delivery of contents to mobile terminals. We have | |||
different options to try and test the ICN and dependencies such as | discussed different options to try and test ICN and dependencies such | |||
ICN functionalities and changes required in different 4G network | as ICN functionalities and changes required in different 4G network | |||
elements. In order to further explore potential use of ICN one can | elements. In order to further explore potential use of ICN, one can | |||
devise an experimental set-up consisting of 4G network elements and | devise an experimental setup consisting of 4G network elements and | |||
deploy ICN data transport in user plane. Different options can be | deploy ICN data transport in the user plane. Different options can | |||
either overlay, dual transport (IP + ICN), hICN, or natively (by | be overlay, dual transport (IP + ICN), hICN, or natively (by | |||
integrating ICN with CDN, eNodeB, SGW, PGW and transport network). | integrating ICN with CDN, eNodeB, SGW, PGW, and a transport network). | |||
Note that, for the scenarios discussed above, additional study is | Note that, for the scenarios discussed above, additional study is | |||
required for lawful interception, billing/mediation, network slicing, | required for lawful interception, billing/mediation, network slicing, | |||
and provisioning APIs. | and provisioning APIs. | |||
Edge Computing [CHENG] provides capabilities to deploy | Edge Computing [CHENG] provides capabilities to deploy | |||
functionalities such as Content Delivery Network (CDN) caching and | functionalities such as CDN caching and mobile user plane functions | |||
mobile user plane functions (UPF) [TS23.501]. Recent research for | (UPFs) [TS23.501]. Recent research for delivering real-time video | |||
delivering real-time video content [MPVCICN] using ICN has also been | content [MPVCICN] using ICN has also been proven to be efficient | |||
proven to be efficient [NDNRTC] and can be used towards realizing the | [NDNRTC] and can be used towards realizing the benefits of using ICN | |||
benefits of using ICN in eNodeB, edge computing, mobile gateways | in an eNodeB, edge computing, Mobile Gateways (SGW/PGW), and CDN. | |||
(SGW, PGW) and CDN. The key aspect for ICN is in its seamless | The key aspect for ICN is in its seamless integration in 4G and 5G | |||
integration in 4G and 5G networks with tangible benefits so we can | networks with tangible benefits so we can optimize content delivery | |||
optimize content delivery using a simple and scalable architecture. | using a simple and scalable architecture. The authors will continue | |||
The authors will continue to explore how ICN forwarding in edge | to explore how ICN forwarding in edge computing could be used for | |||
computing could be used for efficient data delivery from the mobile | efficient data delivery from the mobile edge. | |||
edge. | ||||
Based on our study of control plane signaling, it is not beneficial | Based on our study of control plane signaling, it is not beneficial | |||
to deploy ICN with existing protocols unless further changes are | to deploy ICN with existing protocols unless further changes are | |||
introduced in the control protocol stack itself. | introduced in the control protocol stack itself. | |||
As a starting step towards use of ICN in user plane, it is proposed | As a starting step towards use of ICN in the user plane, it is | |||
to incorporate protocol changes in MT, eNodeB, SGW/PGW for data | proposed to incorporate protocol changes in MT, an eNodeB, and SGW/ | |||
transport. ICN has inherent capabilities for mobility and content | PGW for data transport. ICN has inherent capabilities for mobility | |||
caching, which can improve the efficiency of data transport for | and content caching, which can improve the efficiency of data | |||
unicast and multicast delivery. The authors welcome contributions | transport for unicast and multicast delivery. The authors welcome | |||
and suggestions, including those related to further validations of | contributions and suggestions, including those related to further | |||
the principles by implementing prototype and/or proof of concept in | validations of the principles by implementing prototypes and/or proof | |||
the lab and in the production environment. | of concepts in the lab and in the production environment. | |||
9. Acknowledgements | ||||
We thank all contributors, reviewers, and the chairs for the valuable | ||||
time in providing comments and feedback that helped improve this | ||||
draft. We specially want to mention the following members of the | ||||
IRTF Information-Centric Networking Research Group (ICNRG), listed in | ||||
alphabetical order: Kashif Islam, Thomas Jagodits, Luca Muscariello, | ||||
David R. Oran, Akbar Rahman, Martin J. Reed, Thomas C. Schmidt, | ||||
and Randy Zhang. | ||||
The IRSG review was provided by Colin Perkins. | ||||
10. References | 10. References | |||
10.1. Normative References | 10.1. Normative References | |||
[TS24.008] 3GPP, "Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification; Core | [TS24.008] 3GPP, "Mobile radio interface Layer 3 specification; Core | |||
network protocols; Stage 3", 3GPP TS 24.008 3.20.0, 15 | network protocols; Stage 3", 3GPP TS 24.008 17.7.0, June | |||
December 2005, | 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/24008.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/24008.htm>. | |||
[TS25.323] 3GPP, "Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) | [TS25.323] 3GPP, "Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) | |||
specification", 3GPP TS 25.323 3.10.0, 18 September 2002, | specification", 3GPP TS 25.323 17.0.0, April 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/25323.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/25323.htm>. | |||
[TS29.274] 3GPP, "3GPP Evolved Packet System (EPS); Evolved General | [TS29.274] 3GPP, "3GPP Evolved Packet System (EPS); Evolved General | |||
Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Tunneling Protocol for Control | Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol for | |||
plane (GTPv2-C); Stage 3", 3GPP TS 29.274 10.11.0, 25 June | Control plane (GTPv2-C); Stage 3", 3GPP TS 29.274 17.6.0, | |||
2013, <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/29274.htm>. | June 2022, | |||
<https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/29274.htm>. | ||||
[TS29.281] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio System (GPRS) Tunneling | [TS29.281] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio System (GPRS) Tunnelling | |||
Protocol User Plane (GTPv1-U)", 3GPP TS 29.281 10.3.0, 26 | Protocol User Plane (GTPv1-U)", 3GPP TS 29.281 17.3.0, | |||
September 2011, | June 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/29281.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/29281.htm>. | |||
[TS36.323] 3GPP, "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access | [TS36.323] 3GPP, "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access | |||
(E-UTRA); Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) | (E-UTRA); Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) | |||
specification", 3GPP TS 36.323 10.2.0, 3 January 2013, | specification", 3GPP TS 36.323 17.1.0, July 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/36323.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/36323.htm>. | |||
10.2. Informative References | 10.2. Informative References | |||
[ALM] Augé, J., Carofiglio, G., Grassi, G., Muscariello, L., | [ALM] Augé, J., Carofiglio, G., Grassi, G., Muscariello, L., | |||
Pau, G., and X. Zeng, "Anchor-Less Producer Mobility in | Pau, G., and X. Zeng, "Anchor-Less Producer Mobility in | |||
ICN", Proceedings of the 2Nd ACM Conference on | ICN", ACM-ICN '15: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference | |||
Information-Centric Networking, ACM-ICN'15, ACM DL, | on Information-Centric Networking, pp. 189-190, | |||
pp.189-190, 30 September 2013, | DOI 10.1145/2810156.2812601, September 2015, | |||
<https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2812601>. | <https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2812601>. | |||
[BROWER] Brower, E., Jeffress, L., Pezeshki, J., Jasani, R., and E. | [BROWER] Brower, E., Jeffress, L., Pezeshki, J., Jasani, R., and E. | |||
Ertekin, "Integrating Header Compression with IPsec", | Ertekin, "Integrating Header Compression with IPsec", | |||
MILCOM 2006 - 2006 IEEE Military Communications | MILCOM 2006 - 2006 IEEE Military Communications | |||
conference IEEE Xplore DL, pp.1-6, 23 October 2006, | conference, pp. 1-6, DOI 10.1109/MILCOM.2006.302503, | |||
October 2006, | ||||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4086687>. | <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4086687>. | |||
[CCN] "Content Centric Networking", <http://www.ccnx.org>. | [CCN] FD.io, "Cicn", January 2020, | |||
<https://wiki.fd.io/index.php?title=Cicn&oldid=10316>. | ||||
[CHENG] Liang, C., Yu, R., and X. Zhang, "Information-centric | [CHENG] Liang, C., Yu, R., and X. Zhang, "Information-centric | |||
network function virtualization over 5g mobile wireless | network function virtualization over 5g mobile wireless | |||
networks", IEEE Network Journal vol. 29, number 3, pp. | networks", IEEE Network, Vol. 29, Issue 3, pp. 68-74, June | |||
68-74, 1 June 2015, | 2015, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7113228>. | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7113228>. | ||||
[EMBMS] Zahoor, K., Bilal, K., Erbad, A., and A. Mohamed, | [EMBMS] Zahoor, K., Bilal, K., Erbad, A., and A. Mohamed, | |||
"Service-Less Video Multicast in 5G: Enablers and | "Service-Less Video Multicast in 5G: Enablers and | |||
Challenges", IEEE Network vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 270-276, May | Challenges", IEEE Network, Vol. 34, Issue 3, pp. 270-276, | |||
2020, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9105941>. | DOI 10.1109/MNET.001.1900435, June 2020, | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9105941>. | ||||
[EPCCUPS] Schmitt, P., Landais, B., and F. Yong Yang, "Control and | [EPCCUPS] Schmitt, P., Landais, B., and F. Yong Yang, "Control and | |||
User Plane Separation of EPC nodes (CUPS)", 3GPP The | User Plane Separation of EPC nodes (CUPS)", 3GPP, The | |||
Mobile Broadband Standard, 3 July 2017, | Mobile Broadband Standard, July 2017, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/news-events/3gpp-news/1882-cups>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/news-events/3gpp-news/1882-cups>. | |||
[FOTIOU] Fotiou, N. and G. Polyzos, "ICN privacy and name based | [FOTIOU] Fotiou, N. and G. Polyzos, "ICN privacy and name based | |||
security", ACM-ICN '14: Proceedings of the 1st ACM | security", ACM-ICN '14: Proceedings of the 1st ACM | |||
Conference on Information-Centric Networking ACM Digitial | Conference on Information-Centric Networking, pp. 5-6, | |||
Library, pp. 5-6, September 2014, | DOI 10.1145/2660129.2666711, September 2014, | |||
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2660129.2666711>. | <https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2660129.2666711>. | |||
[GALIS] Galis, A., Makhijani, K., Yu, D., and B. Liu, "Autonomic | [GALIS] Galis, A., Ed., Makhijani, K., Yu, D., and B. Liu, | |||
Slice Networking", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, | "Autonomic Slice Networking", Work in Progress, Internet- | |||
draft-galis-anima-autonomic-slice-networking-05, 26 | Draft, draft-galis-anima-autonomic-slice-networking-05, 26 | |||
September 2018, <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ | September 2018, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/ | |||
draft-galis-anima-autonomic-slice-networking-05.txt>. | draft-galis-anima-autonomic-slice-networking-05>. | |||
[GRAYSON] Grayson, M., Shatzkamer, M., and S. Wainner, "Cisco Press | [GRAYSON] Grayson, M., Shatzkamer, M., and S. Wainner, "IP Design | |||
book "IP Design for Mobile Networks"", Cisco | for Mobile Networks", Cisco Press, Networking Technology | |||
Press Networking Technology series, 15 June 2009, | series, ISBN 1-58705-826-X, June 2009, | |||
<http://www.ciscopress.com/store/ip-design-for-mobile- | <https://www.ciscopress.com/store/ip-design-for-mobile- | |||
networks-9781587058264>. | networks-9781587058264>. | |||
[HICN] Muscariello, L., Carofiglio, G., Auge, J., and M. | [HICN] Muscariello, L., Carofiglio, G., Auge, J., and M. | |||
Papalini, "Hybrid Information-Centric Networking", Work in | Papalini, "Hybrid Information-Centric Networking", Work in | |||
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-muscariello-intarea-hicn- | Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-muscariello-intarea-hicn- | |||
04, 20 May 2020, <https://www.ietf.org/id/draft- | 04, 20 May 2020, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/ | |||
muscariello-intarea-hicn-04.txt>. | draft-muscariello-intarea-hicn-04>. | |||
[I-D.anilj-icnrg-dnc-qos-icn] | ||||
Jangam, A., suthar, P., and M. Stolic, "QoS Treatments in | ||||
ICN using Disaggregated Name Components", Work in | ||||
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-anilj-icnrg-dnc-qos-icn- | ||||
02, 9 March 2020, <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ | ||||
draft-anilj-icnrg-dnc-qos-icn-02.txt>. | ||||
[ICN5G] Ravindran, R., suthar, P., Trossen, D., and G. White, | ||||
"Enabling ICN in 3GPP's 5G NextGen Core Architecture", | ||||
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ravi-icnrg-5gc- | ||||
icn-04, 10 January 2021, | ||||
<https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-irtf-icnrg-5gc-icn-04.txt>. | ||||
[ICNLOWPAN] | [ICN5G] Ravindran, R., Suthar, P., Trossen, D., Wang, C., and G. | |||
Gundogan, C., Schmidt, T., Waehlisch, M., Scherb, C., | White, "Enabling ICN in 3GPP's 5G NextGen Core | |||
Marxer, C., and C. Tschudin, "ICN Adaptation to LowPAN | Architecture", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- | |||
Networks (ICN LoWPAN)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, | irtf-icnrg-5gc-icn-04, 10 January 2021, | |||
draft-irtf-icnrg-icnlowpan-10, 10 February 2021, | <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-icnrg- | |||
<https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-irtf-icnrg-icnlowpan- | 5gc-icn-04>. | |||
10.txt>. | ||||
[ICNQoS] Al-Naday, M.F., Bontozoglou, A., Vassilakis, G., and M. J. | [ICNQoS] Al-Naday, M.F., Bontozoglou, A., Vassilakis, G., and M. J. | |||
Reed, "Quality of Service in an Information-Centric | Reed, "Quality of service in an information-centric | |||
Network", 2014 IEEE Global Communications Conference IEEE | network", 2014 IEEE Global Communications Conference, pp. | |||
Xplore DL, pp. 1861-1866, 8 December 2014, | 1861-1866, DOI 10.1109/GLOCOM.2014.7037079, December 2014, | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7037079>. | <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7037079>. | |||
[IPoICN] Trossen, D., Read, M J., Riihijarvi, J., Georgiades, M., | [IPoICN] Trossen, D., Read, M. J., Riihijarvi, J., Georgiades, M., | |||
Fotiou, N., and G. Xylomenos, "IP over ICN - The better | Fotiou, N., and G. Xylomenos, "IP over ICN - The better | |||
IP?", 2015 European Conference on Networks and | IP?", 2015 European Conference on Networks and | |||
Communications (EuCNC) IEEE Xplore DL, pp. 413-417, 29 | Communications (EuCNC), pp. 413-417, | |||
June 2015, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7194109>. | DOI 10.1109/EuCNC.2015.7194109, June 2015, | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7194109>. | ||||
[MBICN] Carofiglio, G., Gallo, M., Muscariello, L., and D. Perino, | [MBICN] Carofiglio, G., Gallo, M., Muscariello, L., and D. Perino, | |||
"Scalable mobile backhauling via information-centric | "Scalable mobile backhauling via information-centric | |||
networking", The 21st IEEE International Workshop on Local | networking", The 21st IEEE International Workshop on Local | |||
and Metropolitan Area Networks, Beijing, pp. 1-6, 22 April | and Metropolitan Area Networks, Beijing, pp. 1-6, | |||
2015, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7114719>. | DOI 10.1109/LANMAN.2015.7114719, April 2015, | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7114719>. | ||||
[MECSPEC] "Mobile Edge Computing (MEC); Framework and Reference | [MECSPEC] ETSI, "Mobile Edge Computing (MEC); Framework and | |||
Architecture", ETSI European Telecommunication Standards | Reference Architecture", ETSI GS MEC 003, Version 1.1.1, | |||
Institute (ETSI) MEC specification, March 2016, | March 2016, <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/ | |||
<https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/ | ||||
MEC/001_099/003/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC003v010101p.pdf>. | MEC/001_099/003/01.01.01_60/gs_MEC003v010101p.pdf>. | |||
[MPVCICN] Jangam, A., Ravindran, R., Chakraborti, A., Wan, X., and | [MPVCICN] Jangam, A., Ravindran, R., Chakraborti, A., Wan, X., and | |||
G. Wang, "Realtime multi-party video conferencing service | G. Wang, "Realtime multi-party video conferencing service | |||
over information centric network", IEEE International | over information centric network", IEEE International | |||
Conference on Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW) Turin, | Conference on Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW), | |||
Italy, pp. 1-6, 29 June 2015, | Turin, Italy, pp. 1-6, DOI 10.1109/ICMEW.2015.7169810, | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7169810>. | June 2015, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7169810>. | |||
[MUTHANA] Muthana, A. and M. Saeed, "Analysis of User Identity | [MUTHANA] Muthana, A. and M. Saeed, "Analysis of User Identity | |||
Privacy in LTE and Proposed Solution", International | Privacy in LTE and Proposed Solution", International | |||
Journal of Computer Network and Information | Journal of Computer Network and Information | |||
Security(IJCNIS) MECS Press, pp. 54-63, January 2017, | Security(IJCNIS), Vol. 9, Issue 1, pp. 54-63, | |||
<http://www.mecs-press.org/ijcnis/ijcnis-v9-n1/ | DOI 10.5815/ijcnis.2017.01.07, January 2017, | |||
<https://www.mecs-press.org/ijcnis/ijcnis-v9-n1/ | ||||
v9n1-7.html>. | v9n1-7.html>. | |||
[NDNRTC] Gusev, P., Wang, Z., Burke, J., Zhang, L., Yoneda, T., | [NDNRTC] Gusev, P., Wang, Z., Burke, J., Zhang, L., Yoneda, T., | |||
Ohnishi, R., and E. Muramoto, "Real-time Streaming Data | Ohnishi, R., and E. Muramoto, "Real-Time Streaming Data | |||
Delivery over Named Data Networking,", IEICE Transactions | Delivery over Named Data Networking", IEICE Transactions | |||
on Communications vol. E99.B, pp. 974-991, 1 May 2016, | on Communications, Vol. E99.B, Issue 5, pp. | |||
974-991, 10.5815/ijcnis.2017.01.07, May 2016, | ||||
<https://doi.org/10.1587/transcom.2015AMI0002>. | <https://doi.org/10.1587/transcom.2015AMI0002>. | |||
[NGMN] Robson, J., "Backhaul Provisioning for LTE-Advanced and | [NGMN] Robson, J., "Backhaul Provisioning for LTE-Advanced & | |||
Small Cells", Next Generation Mobile Networks, LTE- | Small Cells", Next Generation Mobile Networks, LTE- | |||
Advanced Transport Provisioning, V0.0.14, 20 October 2015, | Advanced Transport Provisioning, Version 0.0.14, October | |||
<https://www.ngmn.org/wp-content/uploads/ | 2015, <https://www.ngmn.org/wp-content/uploads/ | |||
Publications/2015/150929_NGMN_P- | Publications/2015/150929_NGMN_P- | |||
SmallCells_Backhaul_for_LTE-Advanced_and_Small_Cells.pdf>. | SmallCells_Backhaul_for_LTE-Advanced_and_Small_Cells.pdf>. | |||
[NS3EPC] Baldo, N., "The ns-3 EPC module", NS3 EPC Model, | [NS3EPC] ns-3, "The EPC Model", July 2022, | |||
<https://www.nsnam.org/docs/models/html/lte- | <https://www.nsnam.org/docs/models/html/lte- | |||
design.html#epc-model>. | design.html#epc-model>. | |||
[NS3LTE] Baldo, N., "The ns-3 LTE module", NS3 LTE Model, | [NS3LTE] ns-3, "The LTE Model", July 2022, | |||
<https://www.nsnam.org/docs/models/html/lte- | <https://www.nsnam.org/docs/models/html/lte- | |||
design.html#lte-model>. | design.html#lte-model>. | |||
[OFFLOAD] Rebecchi, F., Dias de Amorim, M., Conan, V., Passarella, | [OFFLOAD] Rebecchi, F., Dias de Amorim, M., Conan, V., Passarella, | |||
A., Bruno, R., and M. Conti, "Data Offloading Techniques | A., Bruno, R., and M. Conti, "Data Offloading Techniques | |||
in Cellular Networks: A Survey", IEEE Communications | in Cellular Networks: A Survey", IEEE Communications | |||
Surveys and Tutorials, IEEE Xplore DL, vol:17, issue:2, | Surveys and Tutorials, Vol. 17, Issue 2, pp.580-603, | |||
pp.580-603, 11 November 2014, | DOI 10.1109/COMST.2014.2369742, November 2014, | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6953022>. | <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6953022>. | |||
[OLTEANU] Olteanu, A. and P. Xiao, "Fragmentation and AES Encryption | [OLTEANU] Olteanu, A. and P. Xiao, "Fragmentation and AES encryption | |||
Overhead in Very High-speed Wireless LANs", Proceedings of | overhead in very high-speed wireless LANs", Proceedings of | |||
the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Communications | the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Communications | |||
ICC'09, ACM DL, pp.575-579, 14 June 2009, | ICC'09, pp. 575-579, June 2009, | |||
<http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1817271.1817379>. | <https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1817271.1817379>. | |||
[Open5GCore] | [Open5GCore] | |||
Open5GCore, M., "Open5GCore - Fundamental 4G Core Network | Open5GCore, "Open5GCore - 5G Core Network for Research, | |||
Functionality", Open5GCore, <https://www.open5gcore.org>. | Testbeds and Trials", <https://www.open5gcore.org>. | |||
[QoS-ICN] Jangam, A., Ed., Suthar, P., and M. Stolic, "QoS | ||||
Treatments in ICN using Disaggregated Name Components", | ||||
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-anilj-icnrg-dnc- | ||||
qos-icn-02, 9 March 2020, | ||||
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-anilj-icnrg- | ||||
dnc-qos-icn-02>. | ||||
[RFC4594] Babiarz, J., Chan, K., and F. Baker, "Configuration | [RFC4594] Babiarz, J., Chan, K., and F. Baker, "Configuration | |||
Guidelines for DiffServ Service Classes", RFC 4594, | Guidelines for DiffServ Service Classes", RFC 4594, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC4594, August 2006, | DOI 10.17487/RFC4594, August 2006, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4594>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4594>. | |||
[RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Ed., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, | [RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Ed., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, | |||
T., Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation | T., 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, DOI 10.17487/RFC6459, January 2012, | RFC 6459, DOI 10.17487/RFC6459, January 2012, | |||
skipping to change at page 41, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at line 1792 ¶ | |||
[RFC8609] Mosko, M., Solis, I., and C. Wood, "Content-Centric | [RFC8609] Mosko, M., Solis, I., and C. Wood, "Content-Centric | |||
Networking (CCNx) Messages in TLV Format", RFC 8609, | Networking (CCNx) Messages in TLV Format", RFC 8609, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC8609, July 2019, | DOI 10.17487/RFC8609, July 2019, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8609>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8609>. | |||
[RFC9064] Oran, D., "Considerations in the Development of a QoS | [RFC9064] Oran, D., "Considerations in the Development of a QoS | |||
Architecture for CCNx-Like Information-Centric Networking | Architecture for CCNx-Like Information-Centric Networking | |||
Protocols", RFC 9064, DOI 10.17487/RFC9064, June 2021, | Protocols", RFC 9064, DOI 10.17487/RFC9064, June 2021, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9064>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9064>. | |||
[RFC9139] Gündoğan, C., Schmidt, T., Wählisch, M., Scherb, C., | ||||
Marxer, C., and C. Tschudin, "Information-Centric | ||||
Networking (ICN) Adaptation to Low-Power Wireless Personal | ||||
Area Networks (LoWPANs)", RFC 9139, DOI 10.17487/RFC9139, | ||||
November 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9139>. | ||||
[SDN5G] Page, J. and J. Dricot, "Software-defined networking for | [SDN5G] Page, J. and J. Dricot, "Software-defined networking for | |||
low-latency 5G core network", 2016 International | low-latency 5G core network", 2016 International | |||
Conference on Military Communications and Information | Conference on Military Communications and Information | |||
Systems (ICMCIS) IEEE Xplore DL, pp. 1-7, May 2016, | Systems (ICMCIS), pp. 1-7, | |||
DOI 10.1109/ICMCIS.2016.7496561, May 2016, | ||||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7496561>. | <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7496561>. | |||
[TLVCOMP] Mosko, M., "Header Compression for TLV-based Packets", | [TLVCOMP] Mosko, M., "Header Compression for TLV-based Packets", | |||
ICNRG Buenos Aires IETF 95, 3 April 2016, | ICNRG, Buenos Aires, IETF 95, April 2016, | |||
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2016-icnrg- | <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2016-icnrg- | |||
02/materials/slides-interim-2016-icnrg-2-7>. | 02/materials/slides-interim-2016-icnrg-2-7>. | |||
[TOURANI] Tourani, R., Misra, S., Mick, T., and G. Panwar, | [TOURANI] Tourani, R., Misra, S., Mick, T., and G. Panwar, | |||
"Security, Privacy, and Access Control in Information- | "Security, Privacy, and Access Control in Information- | |||
Centric Networking: A Survey", IEEE Communications Surveys | Centric Networking: A Survey", IEEE Communications Surveys | |||
and Tutorials Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 566-600, September | and Tutorials, Vol. 20, Issue 1, pp. 566-600, | |||
2017, <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8027034>. | DOI 10.1109/COMST.2017.2749508, September 2017, | |||
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8027034>. | ||||
[TS23.203] 3GPP, "Policy and charging control architecture", 3GPP | [TS23.203] 3GPP, "Policy and charging control architecture", 3GPP | |||
TS 23.203 10.9.0, 12 September 2013, | TS 23.203 17.2.0, December 2021, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23203.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23203.htm>. | |||
[TS23.401] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements | [TS23.401] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements | |||
for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network | for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network | |||
(E-UTRAN) access", 3GPP TS 23.401 10.10.0, 7 March 2013, | (E-UTRAN) access", 3GPP TS 23.401 17.5.0, June 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23401.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23401.htm>. | |||
[TS23.501] 3GPP, "System Architecture for the 5G System", 3GPP | [TS23.501] 3GPP, "System architecture for the 5G System (5GS)", 3GPP | |||
TS 23.501 15.2.0, 15 June 2018, | TS 23.501 17.5.0, June 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23501.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23501.htm>. | |||
[TS23.714] 3GPP, "Technical Specification Group Services and System | [TS23.714] 3GPP, "Study on Control Plane (CP) and User Plane (UP) | |||
Aspects: Study on control and user plane separation of EPC | separation of Evolved Packet Core (EPC) nodes", 3GPP | |||
nodes", 3GPP TS 23.714 0.2.2, 4 June 2016, | TS 23.714 14.0.0, June 2016, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23714.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/23714.htm>. | |||
[TS29.060] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS Tunneling | [TS29.060] 3GPP, "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS Tunneling | |||
Protocol (GTP) across the Gn and Gp interface", 3GPP | Protocol (GTP) across the Gn and Gp interface", 3GPP | |||
TS 29.060 3.19.0, 24 March 2004, | TS 29.060 17.3.0, June 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/29060.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/29060.htm>. | |||
[TS29.336] 3GPP, "Home Subscriber Server (HSS) diameter interfaces | ||||
for interworking with packet data networks and | ||||
applications", 3GPP TS 29.336 17.13.1, March 2022, | ||||
<https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/29336.htm>. | ||||
[TS33.310] 3GPP, "Network Domain Security (NDS); Authentication | [TS33.310] 3GPP, "Network Domain Security (NDS); Authentication | |||
Framework (AF)", 3GPP TS 33.310 10.7.0, 21 December 2012, | Framework (AF)", 3GPP TS 33.310 17.3.0, June 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/33310.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/33310.htm>. | |||
[TS33.320] 3GPP, "Security of Home Node B (HNB) / Home evolved Node B | [TS33.320] 3GPP, "Security of Home Node B (HNB) / Home evolved Node B | |||
(HeNB)", 3GPP TS 33.320 10.5.0, 29 June 2012, | (HeNB)", 3GPP TS 33.320 17.0.0, March 2022, | |||
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/33320.htm>. | <https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/33320.htm>. | |||
Acknowledgements | ||||
We thank all contributors, reviewers, and the chairs for their | ||||
valuable time in providing comments and feedback that helped improve | ||||
this document. We especially want to mention the following members | ||||
of the IRTF Information-Centric Networking Research Group (ICNRG), | ||||
listed in alphabetical order: Kashif Islam, Thomas Jagodits, Luca | ||||
Muscariello, David R. Oran, Akbar Rahman, Martin J. Reed, Thomas | ||||
C. Schmidt, and Randy Zhang. | ||||
The IRSG review was provided by Colin Perkins. | ||||
Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
Prakash Suthar | Prakash Suthar | |||
Google Inc. | Google Inc. | |||
Mountain View, California 94043 | Mountain View, California 94043 | |||
United States of America | United States of America | |||
Email: psuthar@google.com | Email: psuthar@google.com | |||
Milan Stolic | Milan Stolic | |||
skipping to change at page 43, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at line 1891 ¶ | |||
San Jose, California 95134 | San Jose, California 95134 | |||
United States of America | United States of America | |||
Email: anjangam@cisco.com | Email: anjangam@cisco.com | |||
Dirk Trossen | Dirk Trossen | |||
Huawei Technologies | Huawei Technologies | |||
Riesstrasse 25 | Riesstrasse 25 | |||
80992 Munich | 80992 Munich | |||
Germany | Germany | |||
Email: dirk.trossen@huawei.com | Email: dirk.trossen@huawei.com | |||
Ravi Ravindran | Ravi Ravindran | |||
F5 Networks | F5 Networks | |||
3545 North First Street | 3545 North First Street | |||
San Jose, 95134 | San Jose, California 95134 | |||
United States of America | United States of America | |||
Email: r.ravindran@f5.com | Email: r.ravindran@f5.com | |||
End of changes. 260 change blocks. | ||||
925 lines changed or deleted | 911 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. |