Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

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

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Milo Orsic Common IMS MMD X.S0013-004 B impact (Discussion)"— Presentation transcript:

1 Milo Orsic Common IMS MMD X.S B impact (Discussion)

2 All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### 2 | Presentation Title | Month 2006 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 All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### 3 | Presentation Title | Month 2006 Common IMS – MMD Part-4 P-CSCF location Home IMS Network Visited IMS Network IP Point of attachment Home IP network Visited IP Network MMD-yes 3GPP-no MMD-yes MMD-no MMD-yes 3GPP-no 3GPP-yes Impact: P-CSCF discovery and provisioning (R-UIM) NAT location and traversal [for signaling and media]

4 All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### 4 | Presentation Title | Month 2006 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 All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### 5 | Presentation Title | Month 2006 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 All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### 6 | Presentation Title | Month 2006 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 All Rights Reserved © Alcatel-Lucent 2006, ##### 7 | Presentation Title | Month 2006 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?)


Download ppt "Milo Orsic Common IMS MMD X.S0013-004 B impact (Discussion)"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google