1 / 7

Common IMS MMD X.S0013-004 B impact (Discussion)

Common IMS MMD X.S0013-004 B impact (Discussion). Milo Orsic. Common IMS – MMD Part-4. Support of IPv6 and IPv4 IMS For SIP signaling (hop-by-hop) For media (end-to-end) Current 3GPP procedures vs. MMD procedures RFC-4091 and RFC-4092 (ANAT) Dual anchoring vs. single IP address.

mattox
Download Presentation

Common IMS MMD X.S0013-004 B impact (Discussion)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Common IMSMMD X.S0013-004 B impact (Discussion) Milo Orsic

  2. Common IMS – MMD Part-4 Support of IPv6 and IPv4 IMS • For SIP signaling (hop-by-hop) • For media (end-to-end) • Current 3GPP procedures vs. MMD procedures • RFC-4091 and RFC-4092 (ANAT) • Dual anchoring vs. single IP address

  3. P-CSCF location Visited IMS Network Home IMS Network IP Point of attachment MMD-yes MMD-no Home IP network 3GPP-yes 3GPP-no MMD-yes MMD-yes Visited IP Network 3GPP-no 3GPP-yes Common IMS – MMD Part-4 • P-CSCF location Impact: P-CSCF discovery and provisioning (R-UIM) NAT location and traversal [for signaling and media]

  4. Common IMS NAT traversal(IPv4 address shortage and “pin-hole” punching) 3GPP assumptions: Single IP address (i.e. no dual anchoring) Pv6 addressing (no IPv6 address shortage); UE IP attachment is at GGSN. GGSN and P-CSCF in the same network. There is no need for NAT insertion between the GGSN and P-CSCF. For Fixed Broadband (NAT at customer premise). NAT traversal for signaling specified (UDP encapsulation of tunneled IPsec).

  5. Common IMS 3GPP2 MMD assumptions: Pv6 and IPv4 addressing (IPv4 address shortage – where to place the NAT?); UE IP attachment in the visited IP network – P-CSCF in the home IMS network (e.g. the NAT is in the visited network). Dual IP addressing (i.e. no dual anchoring). Separation of signaling from media hence e.g. STUN Relay, ICE?). Mobile IP (e.g. DS-MIPv6 – IPsec inside IPsec?)

  6. Common IMS – MMD Part-4 Other differences: 3GPP supports link-level mobility (GPRS). There is a need (e.g. QoS and charging) for IP flow grouping (see RFC-3388 and RFC-3524) and mapping the group onto particular link (i.e. “pdp context”). 3GPP2 supports IP level mobility (MoIP) [no need for IP flow grouping?] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P-Charging-Vector: icid-value= icid-generated-at= orig-ioi= term-ioi= generic-param (access network charging info)

  7. Common IMS – MMD Part-4 ISIM vs. R-UIM/no R-UIM Impact: - R-UIM - Temporary PUID derivation - Home P-CSCF address [FQDN or IP address?] - Authentication procedure (IMS-AKA, Digest, tls,3GPP2-CAVE?)

More Related