1 / 5

L2TP Implementation without LCP Re-negotiation KDDI Proposal

L2TP Implementation without LCP Re-negotiation KDDI Proposal. Masaru Umekawa (umekawa@kddi.com) Masaaki Koga (koga@kddi.com) Masaru Fukumitsu (ma-fukumitsu@kddi.com) Anete Hashimoto (a-hashimoto@kddi.com). 05/08/2002. Why L2TP ?.

melina
Download Presentation

L2TP Implementation without LCP Re-negotiation KDDI Proposal

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. L2TP Implementation without LCP Re-negotiationKDDI Proposal Masaru Umekawa (umekawa@kddi.com) Masaaki Koga (koga@kddi.com) Masaru Fukumitsu (ma-fukumitsu@kddi.com) Anete Hashimoto (a-hashimoto@kddi.com) 05/08/2002 KDDI Confidential Proprietary

  2. Why L2TP ? • To solve the conflict between the Private IP address used among the carries, L2TP tunneling has been considered and agreed within the CDG international roaming team. • In the last CDG meeting, SKT suggested and explained about L2TP tunneling with LCP re-negotiation • Issue:Can the mobile respond properly if the call setup is different in the home data network and in the serving side? KDDI Confidential Proprietary

  3. L2TP Without LCP Re-negotiation • In this material, KDDI suggests L2TP without LCP Re-negotiation as a way to solve the above issue • No need to change current mobile implementation Some clients possibly cannot renegotiate LCP re-negotiation (RFC2809, section4.2) • There is less air resource consumption if LCP re-negotiation is avoided KDDI Confidential Proprietary

  4. Dual Authentication without LCP Re-Negotiation Dial-up Client LAC Serving Radius LNS Home Radius LCP-CFG-REQ Example of attribute for L2TP initialization RFC2868(Section3) - Tunnel-type - Tunnel-Server-Endpoint - Tunnel-Client-Endpoint - etc LCP-CFG-REQ LCP-CFG-ACK LCP-CFG-ACK Example of AVP for LCP Forwarding(RFC2661, Section4.4.5): - Initial Received LCP CONFREQ - Last Sent LCP CONFREQ - Last Received LCP CONFREQ - Proxy Authentication Type - Proxy Authen Name - Proxy Authen Challenge - Proxy Authen ID - Proxy Authen Response - etc PAP-REQ Access-Request Access-Accept SCCRQ (Start-Control-Connection-Request) SCCRP (Start-Control-Connection-Reply) Example of AVP sent in ICRQ: - Calling-Number SCCCN (Start-Control-Connection-Connected) ICRQ(In-Coming-Call-Request) ICRP(In-Coming-Call-Reply) ICCN(In-Coming-Call-Connected) LCP Forwarding as per RFC2809 (section 4.2) SLI(Set-Link-Info) Access-Request L2TP Tunnel Access-Accept Accounting-Request(Start) Accounting-Request(Start) [Optional] Accounting-Response Accounting-Response PAP-ACK IPCP (Configure-Request) IPCP (Configure-Reply) Accounting-Request(Start) PPP Session Accounting-Response KDDI Confidential Proprietary

  5. Reference • RFC2661 Layer Two Tunneling Protocol “L2TP” (Standards track) • RFC2809 Implementation of L2TP Compulsory Tunneling via Radius (Informational) • RFC2868 RADIUS Attributes for Tunnel Protocol Support (Informational) KDDI Confidential Proprietary

More Related