draft-nielsen-v6ops-3GPP-zeroconf-goals-00.txt

[the otter <2the.otter@gmail.com>]

Hi Karen,
Regarding the draft draft-nielsen-v6ops-3GPP-zeroconf-goals-00.txt, I
would like to ask about push functionality and user identity within
the 3GPP network.
PUSH relates to tunnel duration/accessibility:

>6.7. Tunnel Link Sustainability
>
>  The tunnel link established in between a host deploying Zero-
>  Configuration Tunneling and an associated Tunnel Server should be
>  expected to remain in administrative active state for the lifetime of
>  the IPv6 address provided to the host.
>
>  The tunnel protocol must not mandate keep-alive messages to be
>  transmitted by the host simply in order to sustain tunnel link
>  connectivity.

Is it intended that the tunnel remain up while the UE has an active
PDP context?
In an "always-on" network there may be services that perform PUSH
(i.e. server initiated) functions - is it a requirement to allow IP PUSH from
the IPv6 domain toward the client?
I would suggest that this be a requirement or it will limit the
service use cases for this solution.
The PUSH functionality leads on to the User Identity issue which
relates mainly to this section:

>6.6. Address Assignment
>
>  The tunnel protocol must allow for the assignment of at least one
>  globally routable (/128) IPv6 unicast address to use for tunneled
>  IPv6 connectivity over the link provided by the Zero-Configuration
>  Tunneling mechanism.

3GPP networks may utilise a database that combines authentication and
DHCP functions (RADIUS + database). This ensures there is an
authoritative system that can provide "User Identity", that is to say link
IP address to User Account. A service can then query the data base to
resolve an IP address to a User account or vice versa. Is the IPv6
address assignment for the tunnel client compatible with this model?
If this is not provided then some types of services in the IPv6 domain
will not work. May I suggest that maintaining user ID mapping via IP
address be a goal.
If these are not to be goals then perhaps this could be stated.

IMHO the issue I see with leaving these out is the transition mechanism
becomes a solution for only the most basic of "web" type services.
While this makes the solution simple, it removes the motivation for
IPv6 within the 3GPP network. It is important to at least match or
mimic the functionality available in the IPv4 domain.

Best Regards,
N