0 3GPP-3GPP2 Workshop CIMS Puerto Vallarta, MEXICO, 24th – 25th January 2008 Source:3GPP2 Title:Common IMS - Discussion Agenda item:3 Document for:INFORMATION

Common IMS (Stage 2 and Stage 3 Gap Analysis) 3GPP/3GPP2 Common IMS Workshop January 2008 Puerto Vallarta, Mexico

2 Common IMS – Layered Architecture cdma2000 Application Layer WiMax GPRS SDL Core IMS Layer IP Layer Sub-network Access Layer IMS SMS Conf. Server IP Figure 1. PNM Server CSI Server There are two layered models: - There is a Common IMS Layer, and Application Layer on top (Figure 1); - The SIP (IMS) Layer is ”the top” Layer that incorporates all services.

3 Common IMS – Layered Architecture IMS – IP layer interfaces: In layered architecture, a given layer provides services to the layer above it, and obtain services from the layer below it. Hence, the IMS may request services from the IP layer (e.g. QoS) and obtain information from the IP layer (e.g. IP charging information). Models: 1. 1.The Common IMS uses only the transport capabilities (e.g. UDP, TCP) of the underlying IP layer (socket model) The Common IMS uses additional services (e.g. QoS, Polices, Charge authorization). Hence, e.g. Tx, Gq interfaces needed If the UE is capable to request and obtain IP layer services (which don’t have to be authorized by the IMS layer), and e.g. Operator charges per IP layer services, then there is no need for IMS-IP layer interface in the Common IMS core network (e.g. Tx, Gq). Internal interface in the UE not standardized (i.e. it is internal to the UE stack).

4 3GPP2 Transfer Specifications Multi-Part Specifications > > X.S0013-B, MMD Revision B (15 documents) > > X.S0027, Presence (4 documents) > >Non Multi-Part Specifications > > X.S0029, Conferencing > > X.S0049, Emergency Services > > X.S0055, Supplementary Services

5 X.P0013-B Transfer Overview MMD Parts 0 (Overview) and 2 (stage 2) will be migrated into and P-CSCF discovery IMS Identities storage and derivation QoS Concepts, IP version, and Codec references SLF Proxy and Redirect support HSS Collective Differences – –3GPP2 will take action to submit CRs into 3GPP SA2 MMD Part 4 (Stage 3) – –will be migrated into Detailed analysis is provided in subsequent slides later MMD Parts 5 (Cx/Dx Stage-2) and 6 (Cx/Dx Stage-3) – –will be migrated to and See slide 23

6 X.P0013-B Transfer MMD Parts 7 (Charging Arch) and 8 (Accounting Details) – –will be migrated to , , and MMD Part 9 (MMD Optimized Call flows) – –Four scenarios in part 9, two already covered by 3GPP – –The remaining two will merge into TR – –3GPP2 will take action to submit CRs into 3GPP CT1 MMD Parts 10 (Sh Stage 2) and 11 (Sh Stage 3) – –will be migrated and

7 X.P0013-B Transfer MMD Parts 12 (SBBC Stage 2), 13 (Tx protocol), and 14 (Ty protocol) – –PCC equivalent stage 2 and stage 3 documents. – –Detailed analysis will follow in a separate presentation. MMD Part 16 (Messaging) will be migrated into – –Only difference is the reference to codec and file formats MMD

8 Other Specification Transfer Presence (X.P0027) – –Parts X.P , X.P , X.P Minor differences – CRs to be submit to 3GPP SA2, SA3, CT1, – –Network Presence (X.P ) document is access specific and will stay in 3GPP2 Conferencing (X.P0029) – –No significant difference between the PP and PP2 documents – –No transfer action required Emergency Services (X.P0049) – –Detailed analysis for this document is provided in a separate document Supplementary Services (X.P0055) – –Detailed analysis for this document is provided in a separate document

9 Specifications not for Transfer 3GPP2 will maintain and enhance (if required) the following documents: – –SMS-over-IMS (X.P0048) – –MMD Roaming (X.P0052) – –VCC (X.P0042) – –Packet Switched Video Telephony (X.R0039-0)

10 Gap Analysis MMD Part 4 and TS

11 3GPP/3GPP2-Historic Perspective AT the time - the 3GPP2 IP Network and Mobile Stations (MS) supported: – –The link between the MS and the Access Router (PDSN) was established by using the Point to Point Protocol [RFC 1661] and HDLC-like Framing [RFC 1662]. The PPP transparency was support in accordance with RFC – –For IPv4, the Access Router (PDSN) assigned an IPv4 address to the MS during the IPCP phase of PPP according to the RFC cdma2000 GPRS IP Layer Sub-network Access Layer IMS Rel-5 IP IMS ???? IP Application Servers

12 3GPP/3GPP2-Historic Perspective (2) The Access Router (PDSN) supported the two authentication mechanisms: CHAP [RFC 1994] and PAP [RFC 1334]. The Access Router (PDSN) implemented IPCP configuration options as defined in RFC 1877 for the DNS server address negotiation. The Access Router (PDSN) negotiated Primary and Secondary DNS server IP addresses with the MS. – –For IPv6 the following RFCs were supported: – –An IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast Address Format [RFC 3587]; – –Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification [RFC 2460]; – –Neighbour Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6) [RFC 2461]; – –IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC 2462]; – –Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification [RFC 2463]; – –IP Version 6 over PPP [RFC 2472]; – –IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture [RFC 3513].

13 The Access Router (PDSN) supported the following header compression algorithms: -Van Jacobson TCP/IP header compression [RFC 1144]. -ROHC, Framework and four profiles: RTP, UDP, ESP, and uncompressed [RFC 3095] with ROHC over PPP [RFC 3241]; -ROHC: A Link Layer Assisted Profile for IP/UDP/RTP [RFC3242]; -IP Header Compression [RFC 2507] with IP Header Compression over PPP [RFC 2509]; For IPv6 address allocation: Upon negotiation and the establishment of a unique link-local address for both the Access Router (PDSN) and the MS, the Access Router (PDSN) immediately transmitted initial unsolicited Router Advertisement (RA) messages on the PPP link using its link-local address as a source address. The Access Router (PDSN) included a globally unique /64 prefix in the Router Advertisement message to the MS. The MS used this prefix to configure its global IPv6 addresses. 3GPP/3GPP2-Historic Perspective (3)

14 Toward the Network, the Access Router (PDSN) acted as a RADIUS client in accordance with RFC 2865 when communicating with the Visited RADIUS server (e.g. when exchanging the authentication information). The Visited and Home RADIUS Server followed the guidelines specified in RFCs 2865, 2866, and The MS was able to choose an IPv4 only, an IPv6 only, or both IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously. For Mobile IPv4 operation the Dynamic Home Agent Assignment was also supported. For Mobile IPv4 operation the following standards were supported: RFC ; Reverse Tunneling [RFC 3024]; Foreign Agent Challenge/Response [RFC 3012]; NAI Extension [RFC 2794]. 3GPP/3GPP2-Historic Perspective (4)

15 Part 4 – Differences (1) 3GPP supports link-level mobility (GPRS). Hence, the UE will attach itself in the Visited Network using the SGSN. There is no motivation to place the GGSN in the Visited Network if the P-CSCF is in the Home Network. Therefore, the GGSN and P-CSCF are in the same network. The cdma2000 UE IP-attaches itself to the Visited Network. To support IMS services, there is no need to have the P-CSCF in the Visited Network. To obtain the IMS services the UE doesn’t need the P-CSCF in the Visited Network (same as your corporate NAS and associated IPsec to retrieve your ), i.e. the IMS service may be deployed in spite of not being supported in the Visited Network.

16 Part 4 – Differences (2) Impact: – – P-CSCF discovery and provisioning (Removable User Identity Module R-UIM) – – NAT location and traversal [for signaling and media] P-CSCF location Home IMS Network Visited IMS Network IP Point of attachment Home IP network Visited IP Network cdma yes 3GPP-no cdma yes cdma no cdma yes 3GPP-no 3GPP-yes P-CSCF Location:

17 Part 4 – Differences (3) 3GPP supports link-level mobility (GPRS). There is a need for IP flow grouping (e.g. for QoS and charging) specified in RFC-3388 and RFC- 3524, and mapping the groups onto the particular links (i.e. “pdp context”). 3GPP2 supports IP level mobility (MoIP), no need for IP flow groupings (e.g. per IP-flow QoS and charging).

18 Part 4 – Differences (4) 3GPP Assumptions: - Originally the 3GPP assumed only single IPv6 address (no dual IPv4/IPv6 stack in the UE) used for: - For SIP signaling (hop-by-hop) – OK, since only the entry/exit points (e.g. IBCF, I-CSCF) support dual IP addressing and are advertised in the DNS. - For media (end-to-end). Hence, IPv6/IPv4 address translation needed. - No separation of “media path” from “signaling path”. - UE IP attachment is at GGSN. GGSN and P-CSCF in the same network - no need for NAT insertion between the GGSN and P-CSCF. - IPv6 addressing (no IPv6 address shortage) - no need for NATs. - For Fixed Broadband (NAT at customer premise). NAT traversal for signaling specified (UDP encapsulation of tunneled IPsec).

19 Part 4 – Differences (5) 3GPP2 Assumptions: - -The cdma2000 MS may have an IPv4 only, an IPv6 only, or both IPv4 and IPv6 simultaneously. - P-CSCF discovery for IPv4 (RFC 3361 and RFC 2131) supported. - There is no need for IPv6/IPv4 address translation for cdma2000 UEs. S- CSCF must be able to handle cdma2000 UEs and 3GPP UEs (may apply to Fixed Broadband UEs). -Separation of “media path” from “signaling path” possible (UE IP- attached in Visited Network, the P-CSCF in the Home Network). -NAT may be needed due to IPv4 address shortage (currently not addressed in 3GPP2). -Impact of MoIP Route Optimization on signaling and media (currently not addressed in 3GPP2).

20 Part Differences (6) IMS – IP layer interfaces: - -Since the UE may may not need or it is capable to request and obtain IP layer services (which don’t have to be authorized by the IMS layer), and e.g. Operator charges per IP layer services, then there is no need for IMS-IP layer interface (e.g. Tx, Gq) in the Common IMS core network. -In 3GPP2 IMS-IP layer interface (e.g. between P-CSCF and PCRF) is optional and the P-Charging-Vector may contain an empty “access network charging info” parameter.

21 Part Differences (7) 3GPP2 P-Charging-Vector syntax: 3GPP2 supports per IP flow charging, hence the syntax of “access network charging info” parameter is different. P-Charging-Vector: icid-value= icid-generated-at= orig-ioi= term-ioi= generic-param (access network charging info)

22 Part Differences (8) ISIM vs. R-UIM/no R-UIM [Removable User Identity Module] Impact: - R-UIM - Temporary PUID derivation - Home P-CSCF address [FQDN or IP address?] - Authentication procedure (IMS-AKA, SIP Digest, tls)

23 Part 5, 6, 10, and 11: Gap Analysis X.P – and X.P – – –For partitioned HSS deployments 3GPP2 was specified two SLF mechanisms, Redirection SLF and a Proxy SLF. The Redirection SLF is the same that defined in 3GPP. An alternative Proxy SLF mechanism is also defined by 3GPP2. – –3GPP2 will take action to provide CRs to 3GPP SA2, CT1, and CT4 X.P – and X.P – – –The HSS in 3GPP2 has no connectivity to a CDMA circuit switch HLR. 3GPP2 does not support the Sh-Pull operations for “Location Information”.