RFC 6674
Gateway-Initiated Dual-Stack Lite Deployment
The title block is the cute little tag at the top, so here's the lineup: this is RFC 6674, Gateway-Initiated Dual-Stack Lite Deployment 🦋, by F. Brockners, S. Gundavelli, D. Ward (all at Cisco) and S. Speicher (at Deutsche Telekom AG) 💖. It's a Standards Track doc, published July 2012, and its ISSN is 2070-1721 ✨. The title block doesn't list anything it obsoletes or updates, so there's no drama there 💅.
Abstract
okay so GI-DS-Lite is a variant of Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) that's made for certain tunnel-based access setups 🌸. It takes the access tunnels that already exist and extends them past the access gateway, all the way to an IPv4-IPv4 NAT 🔥. It does this with softwires that carry an embedded Context Identifier, which uniquely identifies the end-system the tunneled packets belong to 🫶. The access gateway decides which chunk of traffic actually needs NAT, using local policies, and then sends/receives that chunk to/from this softwire 💜.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document ✨.
This doc is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) 🌈. It represents the consensus of the IETF community, it got public review, and the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) approved it for publication 👑. If you want more on Internet Standards, check Section 2 of RFC 5741 💅.
Info about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to send feedback lives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6674 🎀.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors 💖. All rights reserved 🔒.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), as in effect on the date this document was published 📜. Please read these carefully, because they spell out your rights and restrictions for this document 🙈. Code Components pulled from this document must include Simplified BSD License text, as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions, and they come without warranty, as described in the Simplified BSD License 💀.
Table of Contents
1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Protocol and Related Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Softwire Management and Related Considerations . . . . . . . . 7
6. Softwire Embodiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. GI-DS-Lite Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
A.1. Connectivity Establishment: Example Call Flow . . . . . . 13
A.2. GI-DS-Lite Applicability: Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . 141. Overview 🦋
okay so GI-DS-Lite is a variant of Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) [RFC6333] 🌸. It's built for network architectures that use point-to-point tunnels between the access device and the access gateway 🔥. The access gateway in these models is designed to serve a huge number of access devices 💅. Mobile architectures based on Mobile IPv6 [RFC6275], Proxy Mobile IPv6 [RFC5213], or GPRS Tunnelling Protocol (GTP) [TS29060] are examples of this, and so are broadband architectures based on PPP or point-to-point VLANs as defined by the Broadband Forum [TR59][TR101] ✨.
The DS-Lite approach uses IPv4-in-IPv6 tunnels (or other tunneling modes) to carry the IPv4 traffic from the customer network to the Address Family Transition Router (AFTR) 🧚. An established softwire between the AFTR and the access device handles the traffic forwarding 🦋. This makes the inner IPv4 address irrelevant for traffic routing, and it lets private IPv4 addresses [RFC1918] get shared between customer sites inside the service provider network 💜.
Similarly to DS-Lite, GI-DS-Lite lets the service provider share public IPv4 addresses among different customers by combining tunneling and NAT 🎀. It also allows multiple access devices behind the access gateway to share the same private IPv4 address [RFC1918] 👑. Here's the twist: rather than starting the tunnel right on the access device, GI-DS-Lite logically extends the access tunnels that already exist, going past the access gateway toward the AFTR 🌈. It uses a tunneling mechanism with semantics for carrying context state related to the encapsulated traffic 💖. The payoff is that overlapping IPv4 addresses are supported in the access network, and nothing has to change on the access device or the access architecture 🙌. Extra tunneling overhead in the access network is also left out 🍓.
If, for example, Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE) is the encapsulation chosen, the network between the access gateway and the AFTR can be either IPv4 or IPv6, and the operator can migrate to IPv6 in incremental steps 🫶. Periodt 💅.
2. Conventions 📝
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] 🔑.
The following abbreviations are used within this document 💜:
- AFTR: Address Family Transition Router. An AFTR combines IP-in-IP tunnel termination and IPv4-IPv4 NAT. 🦋
- AD: Access Device. It is the end host, also known as the mobile node in mobile architectures. 📱
- AG: Access Gateway. A gateway in the access network, such as LMA, Home Agent (HA), GGSN, or PDN-GW in mobile architectures. 🌐
- CID: Context Identifier 🎀
- DS-Lite: Dual-Stack Lite 🌸
- GGSN: Gateway GPRS Support Node 🍓
- GI-DS-Lite: Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite ✨
- NAT: Network Address Translator 💅
- PDN-GW: Packet Data Network Gateway 🧚
- SW: Softwire [RFC4925] 🌈
- SWID: Softwire Identifier 👑
3. Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite ✨
okay bestie, this section is the overview of Gateway-Initiated DS-Lite (GI-DS-Lite) and it's giving full deployment vibes 🦋 Figure 1 shows the generic deployment scenario. This generic scenario can be mapped to multiple different access architectures, and some of those are described in Appendix A 🧚
In Figure 1, access devices (AD-1 and AD-2) are connected to the access gateway using some form of tunnel technology, and that same tunnel is used for carrying IPv4 (and optionally IPv6) traffic of the access device 💖 These access devices may also be connected to the access gateway over point-to-point links. How the network delivers the IPv4 address configuration to the access devices depends on the access architecture, and that stuff is outside the scope of this document 🙈 With GI-DS-Lite, the access gateway and AFTR are connected by a softwire [RFC4925]. The softwire is identified by a softwire identifier (SWID). The SWID does not need to be globally unique, i.e., different SWIDs could be used to identify a softwire at the different ends of a softwire. The form of the SWID depends on the tunneling technology used for the softwire. The SWID could, for example, be the endpoints of a GRE tunnel or a VPN-ID. See Section 6 for details ✨
A Context Identifier (CID) is used to multiplex flows associated with the individual access devices onto the softwire. It is deployment dependent whether the flows from a particular AD are identified using the source IP address or an access tunnel identifier. Local policies at the access gateway determine which part of the traffic received from an access device is tunneled over the softwire to the AFTR. The combination of CID and SWID must be unique between the access gateway and AFTR to identify the flows associated with an AD. The CID is typically a 32-bit-wide identifier and is assigned by the access gateway. It is retrieved either from a local or remote (e.g., Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting (AAA)) repository. Like the SWID, the embodiment of the CID depends on the tunnel mode used and the type of the network connecting the access gateway and AFTR. If, for example, GRE [RFC2784] with GRE Key and Sequence Number extensions [RFC2890] is used as the softwire technology, the network connecting the access gateway and AFTR could be an IPv4-only, IPv6-only, or dual-stack IP network. The CID would be carried within the GRE Key field. Section 6 details the different softwire types supported with GI-DS-Lite 🎀
Access Device: AD-1
Context ID: CID-1
NAT Mappings:
IPv4: a.b.c.d +---+ (CID-1, TCP port1 <->
+------+ access tunnel | | e.f.g.h, TCP port2)
| AD-1 |=================| | +---+
+------+ | | | A |
| | Softwire SWID-1 | F |
| A |==========================| T |
IPv4: a.b.c.d | G | (e.g., IPv4-over-GRE | R |
+------+ | | over IPv4 or IPv6) +---+
| AD-2 |=================| |
+------+ access tunnel | | (CID-2, TCP port3 <->
| | e.f.g.h, TCP port4)
+---+
Access Device: AD-2
Context ID: CID-2Figure 1: Gateway-Initiated Dual-Stack Lite Reference Architecture
The AFTR combines softwire termination and IPv4-IPv4 NAT 🔥 The NAT binding of the AD's address could be assigned autonomously by the AFTR from a local address pool, configured on a per-binding basis (either by a remote control entity through a NAT control protocol or through manual configuration), or derived from the CID (e.g., the CID, if 32 bits wide, could be mapped 1:1 to an external IPv4 address). A simple example of a translation table at the AFTR is shown in Figure 2. The choice of the appropriate translation scheme for a traffic flow can take into account parameters such as destination IP address, incoming interface, etc. The IP address of the AFTR, which will either be an IPv6 or an IPv4 address depending on the transport network between the access gateway and the AFTR, is configured on the access gateway. A variety of methods, such as out-of-band mechanisms or manual configuration, apply 💅
+=====================================+======================+
| Softwire-ID/Context-ID/IPv4/Port | Public IPv4/Port |
+=====================================+======================+
| SWID-1/CID-1/a.b.c.d/TCP-port1 | e.f.g.h/TCP-port2 |
| | |
| SWID-1/CID-2/a.b.c.d/TCP-port3 | e.f.g.h/TCP-port4 |
+-------------------------------------+----------------------+Figure 2: Example Translation Table at the AFTR
GI-DS-Lite does not require a 1:1 relationship between an access gateway and AFTR, but more generally applies to (M:N) scenarios, where M access gateways are connected to N AFTRs. Multiple access gateways could be served by a single AFTR. AFTRs could be dedicated to specific groups of access devices, groups of access gateways, or geographic regions. An AFTR could be, but does not have to be, co-located with an access gateway 🌸
4. Protocol and Related Considerations 👑
- Depending on the embodiment of the CID (e.g., for GRE encapsulation with GRE Key), the NAT binding entry maintained at the AFTR, which reflects an active flow between an access device inside the network and a node in the Internet, SHOULD be extended to include the CID and the identifier of the softwire (SWID) ✨
- When creating an IPv4-to-IPv4 NAT binding for an IPv4 packet flow received from the access gateway over the softwire, the AFTR SHOULD associate the CID with that NAT binding. It SHOULD use the combination of CID and SWID as the unique identifier and use those parameters in the NAT binding entry 💜
- When forwarding a packet to the access device, the AFTR SHOULD obtain the CID from the NAT binding associated with that flow. For example, in case of GRE encapsulation, it SHOULD add the CID to the GRE Key and Sequence Number extension of the GRE header and tunnel it to the access gateway 🦋
- On receiving any packet from the softwire, the AFTR SHOULD obtain the CID from the incoming packet and use it for performing NAT binding lookup and packet translation before forwarding the packet 🫶
- The access gateway, on receiving any IPv4 packet from the access device, SHOULD lookup the CID for that access device. In case of GRE encapsulation, it can, for example, add the CID to the GRE Key and Sequence Number extension of the GRE header and tunnel it to the AFTR 🍓
- On receiving any packet from the softwire, the access gateway SHOULD obtain the CID from the packet and use it for making the forwarding decision 🧚
- When encapsulating an IPv4 packet, the access gateway and AFTR SHOULD use its Diffserv Codepoint (DSCP) to derive the DSCP (or MPLS Traffic-Class Field in the case of MPLS) of the softwire 🌈
5. Softwire Management and Related Considerations 🎀
The following are the considerations related to the operational management of the softwire between the AFTR and access gateway 🥹
- The softwire between the access gateway and the AFTR MAY be created at system startup time OR dynamically established on-demand. It is deployment dependent which Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) mechanisms (such as ICMP, Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC5880], or Label Switched Path (LSP) ping [RFC4379]) are employed by the access gateway and AFTR for softwire health management and corresponding protection strategies 🔧
- The softwire peers MAY be provisioned to perform policy enforcement, such as for determining the protocol type or overall portion of traffic that gets tunneled or for any other settings related to quality of service. The specific details on how this is achieved or the types of policies that can be applied are outside the scope for this document 💅
- The softwire peers SHOULD use the correct path MTU value for the tunnel path between the access gateway and the AFTR. This value MAY be statically configured at softwire creation time or dynamically discovered using the standard path MTU discovery techniques 📏
- An access gateway and an AFTR can have multiple softwires established between them (e.g., to separate address domains, provide for load-sharing, etc.) 👯♀️
- Softwire Embodiments ✨
Okay so bestie, which tunnel tech you can use for the softwire between an access gateway and the AFTR depends on the deployment and what you actually need 🫶 You've got GRE with the GRE Key extension, MPLS VPNs [RFC4364], or plain IP-in-IP encapsulation. And the softwire ID (SWID) and the CID totally depend on which tunnel you pick 💅
- GRE with GRE Key: the SWID is the tunnel identifier of the GRE tunnel between the access gateway and the AFTR. The CID is the GRE Key linked to the AD. 🎀
- MPLS VPN: the SWID is a generic identifier that uniquely identifies the VPN at either the access gateway or the AFTR. Depending on whether the access gateway or AFTR is acting as customer edge (CE) or provider edge (PE), the SWID could be, for example, an attachment circuit identifier, or an identifier for the set of VPN route labels pointing to routes within the VPN, etc. The AD's IPv4 address is the CID. For a given VPN, the AD's IPv4 address MUST be unique. 🦋
- IPv4/IPv6-in-MPLS: the SWID is the top MPLS label. The CID might be the next MPLS label in the stack, if there is one, or the IP address of the AD. 🧚
- IPv4-in-IPv4: the SWID is the outer IPv4 source address. The AD's IPv4 address is the CID. For a given outer IPv4 source address, the AD's IPv4 address MUST be unique. 🌸
- IPv4-in-IPv6: the SWID is the outer IPv6 source address. If the AD's IPv4 address is used as the CID, the AD's IPv4 address MUST be unique. If the IPv6 Flow Label [RFC6437] is used as the CID, the IPv4 addresses of the ADs MAY overlap. The IPv6 Flow Label is only 20 bits wide, which is shorter than the recommended 32-bit CID, so large-scale deployments might need extra scaling considerations 😭 Also, you SHOULD make sure the IP Flow Label is randomized enough so it doesn't interfere with other uses of the Flow Label, like Equal Cost Multipath (ECMP) support 💀
Figure 3 gives you an overview of the different tunnel modes for each deployment scenario. An "x" means that scenario is supported. Here are the abbreviations:
- IPv4 address
- "up": deployments with "unique private IPv4 addresses" assigned to the access devices are supported.
- "op": deployments with "overlapping private IPv4 addresses" assigned to the access devices are supported.
- "s": deployments where all access devices are assigned the same IPv4 address are supported.
- Network-type
- "v4": the access gateway and AFTR are connected by an IPv4-only network.
- "v6": the access gateway and AFTR are connected by an IPv6-only network.
- "v4v6": the access gateway and AFTR are connected by a dual-stack network, supporting IPv4 and IPv6.
- "MPLS": the access gateway and AFTR are connected by an MPLS network
+===================+==============+=======================+
| | IPv4 address| Network-type |
| Softwire +----+----+---+----+----+------+------+
| | up | op | s | v4 | v6 | v4v6 | MPLS |
+====================+====+====+===+====+====+======+======+
| GRE with GRE Key | x | x | x | x | x | x | |
| MPLS VPN | x | x | | | | | x |
| IPv4/IPv6-in-MPLS | x | x | x | | | | x |
| IPv4-in-IPv4 | x | | | x | | | |
| IPv4-in-IPv6 | x | | | | x | | |
| IPv4-in-IPv6 w/ FL | x | x | x | | x | | |
+====================+====+====+===+====+====+======+======+Figure 3: Tunnel Modes and Their Applicability 🍓
7. Security Considerations 💀
Okay this part is SERIOUS bestie 😤 The approach in this document lets you use Dual-Stack Lite for tunnel-based access architectures. Instead of starting the tunnel at the access device, GI-DS-Lite basically extends the access tunnel that already exists, past the access gateway and toward the AFTR, and builds a virtual softwire between the AFTR and the access device. This needs an additional Context Identifier at the AFTR and at the access gateway, and it MUST be there because it's what makes IP packet-forwarding decisions 🔥
If a packet shows up with the wrong Context Identifier at the access gateway or AFTR, it gets linked to the wrong access device 😱 So you MUST make sure an IP packet tunneled between the access gateway and the AFTR is carried with the Context Identifier of the access device that packet belongs to. The Context Identifier isn't carried from the access device, and one access device can't claim the Context Identifier of some other access device. BUT an on-path attacker between the access gateway and the AFTR could modify the Context Identifier in the packet, which would link the packet to the wrong access device 👀 This threat is no different from an on-path attacker changing the source or destination address of an IP packet. Still, you can prevent it by turning on IPsec with integrity protection between the access gateway and the AFTR, which makes sure the Context Identifier and the inner packet stay correctly bound together 🛡️✨
This specification doesn't add any new security considerations beyond the ones in the Dual-Stack Lite specification [RFC6333], and the ones in the security considerations for whichever access architecture you're using with this transition scheme, like Proxy Mobile IPv6 🦋
8. Acknowledgements 🫶
The authors want to give a shoutout to the people they talked this through with: Mark Grayson, Jay Iyer, Kent Leung, Vojislav Vucetic, Flemming Andreasen, Dan Wing, Jouni Korhonen, Teemu Savolainen, Parviz Yegani, Farooq Bari, Mohamed Boucadair, Vinod Pandey, Jari Arkko, Eric Voit, Yiu L. Lee, Tina Tsou, Guo-Liang Yang, Cathy Zhou, Olaf Bonness, Paco Cortes, Jim Guichard, Stephen Farrell, Pete Resnik, and Ralph Droms 👑💖
9. References 📚
9.1. Normative References
[RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P.
Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784,
March 2000.
[RFC2890] Dommety, G., "Key and Sequence Number Extensions to GRE",
RFC 2890, September 2000.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, February 2006.
[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006.
[RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.
[RFC5555] Soliman, H., "Mobile IPv6 Support for Dual Stack Hosts and
Routers", RFC 5555, June 2009.
[RFC5844] Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
Mobile IPv6", RFC 5844, May 2010.
[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010.
[RFC6275] Perkins, C., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.
[RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4
Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011.
[RFC6437] Amante, S., Carpenter, B., Jiang, S., and J. Rajahalme,
"IPv6 Flow Label Specification", RFC 6437, November 2011.9.2. Informative References
[NAT-CONTROL]
Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Singh, V., and V. Fajardo,
"Diameter Network Address and Port Translation Control
Application", Work in Progress, April 2012.
[RFC4925] Li, X., Dawkins, S., Ward, D., and A. Durand, "Softwire
Problem Statement", RFC 4925, July 2007.
[TR101] Broadband Forum, "TR-101: Migration to Ethernet-Based DSL
Aggregation", April 2006.
[TR59] Broadband Forum, "TR-059: DSL Evolution - Architecture
Requirements for the Support of QoS-Enabled IP Services",
September 2003.
[TS23060] 3GPP, "Technical Specification Group Services and System
Aspects; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); Service
description; Stage 2, V11.2.0", TS 23.060, 2012.
[TS23401] 3GPP, "Technical Specification Group Services and System
Aspects; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements
for Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network
(E-UTRAN) access, V11.1.0", TS 23.401, 2012.
[TS29060] 3GPP, "Technical Specification Group Core Network and
Terminals; General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); GPRS
Tunnelling Protocol (GTP), V11.3.0", TS 29.060, 2012.A.1. Connectivity Establishment: Example Call Flow ✨
okay so bestie, Figure 4 is the call flow that links the access tunnel setup on the access gateway with the softwire to the AFTR 🦋 it's a simple example, and it assumes all the traffic from the AD goes through a single access tunnel. The access gateway uses local policies to figure out which part of that traffic should get forwarded to the AFTR 💅
AD Access Gateway AAA/Policy AFTR
| | | |
|----(1)-------->| | |
| (2)<-------------->| |
| (3) | |
| |<------(4)------------------->|
| (5) | |
|<---(6)-------->| | |
| | | |Figure 4: Example Call Flow for Session Establishment 🌸
- The access gateway receives a request to create an access tunnel endpoint. 📩
- The access gateway authenticates and authorizes the access tunnel. Based on local policy or through interaction with the AAA/Policy system, the access gateway recognizes that IPv4 service should be provided using GI-DS-Lite. 🔐
- The access gateway creates an access tunnel endpoint. The access tunnel links AD and access gateway. 🎀
- (Optional): The access gateway and the AFTR establish a control session between themselves. This session can, for example, be used to exchange accounting or NAT-configuration information. Accounting information could be supplied to the access gateway, AAA/Policy, or other network entities that require information about the externally visible address/port pairs of a particular access device. The Diameter NAT Control Application [NAT-CONTROL] could, for example, be used for this purpose. 🧚
- The access gateway allocates a unique CID and associates those flows received from the access tunnel that need to be tunneled towards the AFTR with the softwire linking the access gateway and AFTR. Local forwarding policy on the access gateway determines which traffic will need to be tunneled towards the AFTR. 🍓
- The access gateway and AD complete the access tunnel establishment. Depending on the procedures and mechanisms of the corresponding access network architecture, this step can include the assignment of an IPv4 address to the AD. 👑
A.2. GI-DS-Lite Applicability: Examples 🌈
The section outlines deployment examples of the generic GI-DS-Lite architecture described in Section 3. so many access setups, so little time 🙈
- Access architectures based on Mobile-IP: In a network scenario based on Dual-Stack Mobile IPv6 (DSMIPv6) [RFC5555], the Mobile IPv6 home agent will implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function along with the dual-stack Mobile IPv6 functionality. 💜
- Access architectures based on Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6): In a PMIPv6 [RFC5213] scenario, the local mobility anchor (LMA) will implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function along with the PMIPv6 IPv4 support [RFC5844] functionality. ✨
- GTP-based access architectures: Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) TS 23.401 [TS23401] and 3GPP TS 23.060 [TS23060] define mobile access architectures using GTP. For GI-DS-Lite, the PDN-GW or GGSN will also assume the access gateway function. 📱
- Fixed Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX) architecture: If GI-DS-Lite is applied to fixed WiMAX, the Access Service Network Gateway (ASN-GW) will implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function. 🛰️
- Mobile WiMAX: If GI-DS-Lite is applied to mobile WiMAX, the home agent will implement the access gateway function. 🌷
- PPP-based broadband access architectures: If GI-DS-Lite is applied to PPP-based access architectures, the Broadband Remote Access Server (BRAS) or Broadband Network Gateway (BNG) will implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function. 🏠
- In broadband access architectures using per-subscriber VLANs: the BNG will implement the GI-DS-Lite access gateway function. 🦋
Authors' Addresses 🎀
Here are the authors and how to reach them, bestie 💖
Frank Brockners
Cisco
Hansaallee 249, 3rd Floor
Duesseldorf, Nordrhein-Westfalen 40549
Germany
EMail: fbrockne@cisco.comSri Gundavelli
Cisco
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
EMail: sgundave@cisco.comSebastian Speicher
Deutsche Telekom AG
Landgrabenweg 151
Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen 53277
Germany
EMail: sebastian.speicher@telekom.deDavid Ward
Cisco
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
EMail: wardd@cisco.com📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc6674 2012-07
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms