Native Deployment of ICN in LTE, 4G Mobile Networks
draft-suthar-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-02
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Replaced".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Prakash Suthar , Milan Stolic , Anil Jangam | ||
| Last updated | 2017-07-02 | ||
| Replaced by | draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g, draft-irtf-icnrg-icn-lte-4g, RFC 9269 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-suthar-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-02
ICN Research Group Prakash Suthar
Internet-Draft Milan Stolic
Intended status: Informational Anil Jangam
Cisco Systems
Expires: January 3, 2018 July 02 2017
Native Deployment of ICN in LTE, 4G Mobile Networks
draft-suthar-icnrg-icn-lte-4g-02
Abstract
LTE, 4G mobile networks use IP transport which is not optimized for
data transport. IP unicast routing from server to clients is used for
delivery of multimedia content to User Equipment (UE), where each
user gets separate stream. From bandwidth and routing perspective
this approach is inefficient. Multicast and broadcast technologies
have emerged recently for mobile networks, but their deployments are
very limited or at an experimental stage due to complex architecture
and radio spectrum issues. ICN is a rapidly emerging technology with
built in features for efficient multimedia data delivery, however
majority of the work is focused on fixed networks. The main focus of
this draft is on native deployment of ICN in cellular mobile networks
by using ICN into 3GPP protocol stack. ICN has an inherent capability
for multicast, anchorless mobility, security and it is optimized for
data delivery using local caching at the edge. The native ICN or dual
stack (along with IP) deployment will bring all inherent benefits and
help in optimizing mobile networks.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress".
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. LTE, 4G Mobile Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1 Network Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 QoS Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3 Data Transport Using IP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4 Virtualizing Mobile Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Data Transport Using ICN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. ICN Deployment in 4G and LTE Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1 Recommendations in LTE Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2 Recommendations in the User Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2.1 Dual stack ICN Deployments in UE . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.2 Native ICN Deployments in UE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2.3 ICN Deployment in eNodeB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2.4 ICN Deployment in Packet Core (SGW, PGW) Gateways . . . 16
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
1 Introduction
LTE mobile technology is built as all IP network. It uses IP routing
protocols such as OSPF, ISIS, BGP etc. to establish network routes to
route the data traffic to end user's device. Stickiness of IP address
to a device is the key to get connected to a mobile network and the
same IP address is maintained through the session until the device
gets detached or moves to another network.
One of the key protocols used in 4G and LTE networks is GPRS
Tunneling protocol (GTP). GTP, DIAMETER and other protocols are built
on top of IP. One of the biggest challenges with IP based routing is
that it is not optimized for data transport although it is the most
efficient communication protocol. By native implementation of
Information Centric Networking (ICN) in 3GPP, we can re-architect
mobile network and optimize its design for efficient data transport
by leveraging the caching feature of ICN. ICN also offers an
opportunity to leverage inherent capabilities of multicast,
anchorless mobility management, authentication. This draft provides
insight into different options for deploying ICN in mobile networks
and how they impact mobile providers and end-users.
1.1 Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2. LTE, 4G Mobile Network
2.1 Network Overview
With the introduction of LTE, mobile networks moved to all-IP
transport for all elements such as eNodeB, MME, SGW/PGW, HSS, PCRF,
routing and switching etc. Although LTE network is data-centric, it
has support for legacy Circuit Switch features like voice and SMS
through transitional CS fallback and flexible IMS deployment
[GRAYSON]. For each mobile device attached to the radio (eNodeB)
there is a separate overlay tunnel (GPRS Tunneling Protocol, GTP)
between eNodeB and Mobile gateways (i.e. SGW, PGW). This tunnel is
used to carry user traffic between gateways and mobile devices so the
data can only be distributed using unicast mechanism.
It is also important to understand the overhead of a GTP and IPSec
protocols because it has impact on the carried user data traffic. All
mobile backhaul traffic is encapsulated using GTP tunnel, which has
overhead of 8 bytes on top of IP and UDP [NGMN]. Additionally, if
IPSec is used for security (which is often required if the Service
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
provider is using a shared backhaul), it adds additional overhead
based upon IPSec tunneling model (tunnel or transport), and
encryption and authentication header algorithm used. If we factor
Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) encryption with packet size the
overhead can vary significantly [IPSEC2].
+-------+ Diameter +-------+
| HSS |------------| SPR |
+-------+ +-------+
| |
+------+ +------+ S4 | +-------+
| 3G |---| SGSN |----------------|------+ +------| PCRF |
^ |NodeB | | |---------+ +---+ | | +-------+
+-+ | +------+ +------+ S3 | | S6a | |Gxc |
| | | +-------+ | | |Gx
+-+ | +------------------| MME |------+ | | |
UE v | S1MME +-------+ S11 | | | |
+----+-+ +-------+ +-------+
|4G/LTE|------------------------------| SGW |-----| PGW |
|eNodeB| S1U +-------+ +--| |
+------+ | +-------+
+---------------------+ | |
S1U GTP Tunnel traffic | +-------+ | |
S2a GRE Tunnel traffic |S2A | ePDG |-------+ |
S2b GRE Tunnel traffic | +-------+ S2B |SGi
SGi IP traffic | | |
+---------+ +---------+ +-----+
| Trusted | |Untrusted| | CDN |
|non-3GPP | |non-3GPP | +-----+
+---------+ +---------+
| |
+-+ +-+
| | | |
+-+ +-+
UE UE
Figure-1: LTE, 4G Mobile Network Overview
When any UE is powered-up, it attaches to a mobile network based on
its configuration and subscription. After successful attach
procedure, UE registers with the mobile core network and IPv4 and/or
IPv6 address is assigned. A default bearer is created for each UE and
it is assigned to default Access Point Name (APN).
The data delivered to mobile devices is unicast inside GTP tunnel. If
we consider combined impact of GTP, IPSec and unicast traffic, the
data delivery is not efficient. IETF has developed various header
compression algorithms to reduce the overhead associated with IP
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
packets. Some of techniques are robust header compression (ROHC) and
enhanced compression of the real-time transport protocol (ECRTP) so
that impact of overhead created by GTP, IPsec etc. is reduced to some
extent [BROWER]. For commercial mobile networks, 3GPP has adopted
different mechanisms for header compression to achieve efficiency in
data delivery [TS25.323], and can also be used in ICN as well.
2.2 QoS Challenges
During the attach procedure, default bearer is created for each UE
and it is assigned to the default Access Point Name (APN). The QoS
parameters such as uplink/downlink bandwidth assigned during initial
attach are minimal. Additional dedicated bearer(s) with enhanced QoS
parameters can be established depending on the specific application
requirements.
While all traffic within a certain bearer gets the same treatment,
QoS parameters supporting these requirements can be very granular in
different bearers. These values vary for the control, management and
user traffic, and depending on the application key parameters, such
as latency, jitter (important for voice and other real-time
applications), packet loss and queuing mechanism (strict priority,
low-latency, fair etc.) can be very different.
Implementation of QoS for mobile networks is done at two stages: at
content prioritization/marking and transport marking, and congestion
management. From the transport perspective, QoS is defined at layer-2
as class of service (CoS) and at layer-3 either as DiffServ code
point (DSCP) or type of service (ToS). The mapping of CoS to DSCP
takes place at layer-2/3 switching and routing elements. 3GPP has
specified QoS Class Identifier (QCI) which represents different types
of content and equivalent mapping to DSCP at transport layer
[TS23.203] [TS23.401]; however, this again requires manual
configuration at different elements and if there is misconfiguration
at any place in the path it will not work properly.
In summary QoS configuration for mobile network for user plane (for
user traffic) and transport in IP based mobile network is complex and
it require synchronization of parameters among different platforms.
Any misconfiguration in IP QoS can result in poor subscriber
experience. By deploying ICN, we intend to enhance the subscriber
experience using its inherent capabilities.
2.3 Data Transport Using IP
The data delivered to mobile devices is unicast inside GTP tunnel
from a eNodeB to a PDN gateway (PGW), as described in 3GPP
specifications [TS23.401]. While the technology exists to address the
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
issue of possible multicast delivery, there are many difficulties
related to multicast protocol implementation on the RAN side of the
network. Transport networks in the backhaul and core have addressed
the multicast delivery long time ago and have implemented it in most
cases in their multi-purpose integrated transport, but the RAN part
of the network is still lagging behind due to complexities related to
mobility of the clients, handovers, and the fact that the potential
gain to the Service Providers may not justify the investment. With
that said, the data delivery in the mobility remains greatly unicast.
To ease the burden on the bandwidth of the SGi interface, caching is
introduced in a similar manner as with many Enterprises. In the
mobile networks, whenever possible, a cached data is delivered.
Caching servers are placed at a centralized location, typically in
the Service Provider's Data Center, or in some cases lightly
distributed in the Packet Core locations with the PGW nodes close to
the Internet and IP services access (SGi interface). This is a very
inefficient concept because traffic has to traverse the entire
backhaul path for the data to be delivered to the end-user. Other
issues, such as out-of-order delivery contribute to this complexity
and inefficiency but could be addressed at the IP transport level.
The data delivered to mobile devices is unicast inside a GTP tunnel.
If we consider combined impact of GTP, IPSec and unicast traffic, the
data delivery is not efficient. By deploying ICN, we intend to either
terminate GTP tunnel at the edge by leveraging control and user plane
separation or replace it with the native ICN protocols.
2.4 Virtualizing Mobile Networks
The Mobile packet core deployed in a major service provider network
is either based on dedicated hardware or large capacity x86 platforms
in some cases. With adoption of Mobile Virtual Network Operators
(MVNO), public safety network, and enterprise mobility network, we
need elastic mobile core architecture. By deploying mobile packet
core on a commercially off the shelf (COTS) platform using
virtualized infrastructure (NFVI) framework and end-to-end
orchestration, we can simplify new deployments and provide optimized
total cost of ownership (TCO).
While virtualization is growing and many mobile providers use hybrid
architecture consisting of dedicated and virtualized infrastructures,
the control and data delivery planes are still the same. There is
also work underway to separate control plane and user plane so that
the network can scale better. Virtualized mobile networks and network
slicing with control and user plane separation provide mechanism to
evolve GTP-based architecture to open-flow SDN-based signaling for
LTE and proposed 5G. Some of early architecture work for 5G mobile
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
technologies provide mechanism for control and user plane separation
and simplifies mobility call flow by introduction of open-flow based
signaling is described in [TS23.501] and [TS23.214].
4. Data Transport Using ICN
For mobile devices, the edge connectivity to the network is between
radio and a router or mobile edge computing (MEC) [MECSPEC] element.
MEC has the capability of processing client requests and segregating
control and user traffic at the edge of radio rather than sending all
requests to the mobile gateway.
MEC transforms radio into an intelligent service edge that is capable
of delivering highly personalized services directly from the edge of
the network, while providing the best possible performance to the
client. MEC can be an ideal candidate for ICN forwarder in addition
to its usual function of managing mobile termination. In addition to
MEC, other transport elements, such as routers, can work as ICN
forwarders.
Data transport using ICN is different compared to IP-based transport.
It evolves the Internet infrastructure by introducing uniquely named
data as a core Internet principle. Communication in ICN takes place
between content provider (producer) and end user (consumer) as
described in figure 2.
+----------+
| Content +----------------------------------------+
| Publisher| |
+---+---+--+ |
| | +--+ +--+ +--+ |
| +--->|R1|------------>|R2|---------->|R4| |
| +--+ +--+ +--+ |
| | Cached |
| v content |
| +--+ at R3 |
| +========|R3|---+ |
| # +--+ | |
| # | |
| v v |
| +-+ +-+ |
+---------------| |-------------| |-------------+
+-+ +-+
Consumer-1 Consumer-2
UE UE
===> Content flow from cache
---> Content flow from publisher
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
Fig. 2. ICN Architecture
Every node in a physical path between a client and a content provider
is called ICN forwarder or router, and it has the ability to route
the request intelligently and also cache the content so that it can
be delivered locally for subsequent request from any other client.
For mobile network, transport between a client and a content provider
consists of radio network + mobile backhaul and IP core transport +
Mobile Gateways + Internet + content data network (CDN).
In order to understand suitability of ICN for mobile networks, we
will discuss the ICN framework describing protocols architecture and
different types of messages, and then consider how we can use this in
a mobile network for delivering content more efficiently. ICN uses
two types of packets called "interest packet" and "data packet" as
described in figure 3.
+------------------------------------+
Interest | +------+ +------+ +------+ | +-----+
+-+ ---->| CS |---->| PIT |---->| FIB |--------->| CDN |
| | | +------+ +------+ +------+ | +-----+
+-+ | | Add | Drop | | Forward
UE <--------+ Intf v Nack v |
Data | |
+------------------------------------+
+------------------------------------+
+-+ | Forward +------+ | +-----+
| | <-------------------------------------| PIT |<---------| CDN |
+-+ | | Cache +--+---+ | Data +-----+
UE | +--v---+ | |
| | CS | v |
| +------+ Discard |
+------------------------------------+
Fig. 3. ICN Interest, Data Packet and Forwarder
For LTE network, when a mobile device wants to get certain content,
it will send an Interest message to the closest eNodeB.
Interest packet follows the TLV format [CCNxTLV] and contains
mandatory fields such as name of the content and nonce. Name and
nonce together uniquely identify an Interest packet. Nonce is also
used to detect looping Interest messages. Interest packet also
contains optional fields such as selector and guider fields.
Selectors provides a specific filtering action during matching and
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
selection of the name prefixes. Guiders provides specific set of
rules on how the Interest packet can be processed at the forwarder.
First ICN router will receive Interest packet and perform lookup if
request for such content has come earlier from any other client. If
yes, it is served from the local cache, otherwise request is
forwarded to the next-hop ICN router. Each ICN router maintains three
data structures, namely Pending Interest Table (PIT), Forwarding
Information Base (FIB), and Content Store (CS). The Interest packet
travels hop-by-hop towards content provider. Once the Interest
reaches the content provider it will return a Data packet containing
information such as content name, signature, signed key and data.
Data packet travels in reverse direction following the same path
taken by the interest packet so routing symmetry is maintained.
Details about algorithms used in PIT, FIB, CS and security trust
models are described in various resources [CCN], here we explained
the concept and its applicability to the LTE network.
5. ICN Deployment in 4G and LTE Networks
5.1 Recommendations in LTE Signaling
In this section we analyze signaling messages which are required for
different procedures, such as attach, handover, tracking area update
etc. The goal of analysis is to see if there is any benefit to
replace IP-based protocols with ICN for LTE signaling in the current
architecture. It is important to understand the concept of point of
attachment (POA). When UE connects to a network it has at least three
POAs:
1. eNodeb managing location or physical POA
2. Authentication and Authorization (MME, HSS) managing identity
or authentication POA
3. Mobile Gateways (SGW, PGW) managing logical or session
management POA.
In current architecture IP transport is used for all the messages
associated with Control Plane for mobility and session management. IP
is embedded very deeply into these messages and TLV carrying
additional attributes as a layer-3 transport . Physical POA in eNodeB
handles both mobility and session management for any UE attached to
4G, LTE network. The number of mobility management messages between
different nodes in an LTE network per signaling procedure are given
below in figure 4.
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
Normally two types of UE devices attach to LTE network: SIM based
(need 3GPP mobility protocol for authentications) or non-SIM based
(which connect to WiFi network), and authentication is required for
both of these device types. For non-SIM based devices, AAA is used
for authentication. We do not propose to change UE authentication
procedures for user data transport using ICN, or any other mobility
management messaging. A separate study would be required to analyze
impact of ICN on mobility management messages structures and flows.
We are merely analyzing the viability of implementing ICN as a
transport for Control plane messages.
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+
| LTE Signaling Procedures | MME | HSS | SGW | PGW | PCRF |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Attach | 10 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Additional default bearer | 4 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Dedicated bearer | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| Idle-to-connect | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Connect-to-Idle | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| X2 handover | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| S1 handover | 8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Tracking area update | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 34 | 2 | 14 | 6 | 3 |
+---------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------+
Fig. 4. Signaling Messages in LTE Gateways
It is important to note that even if we don't implement ICN in MME
and HSS, they still need to support either dual stack or native ICN
UE capabilities. When UE initiates attach request using the identity
as ICN, MME must be able to parse that message and create a session.
MME forwards UE authentication to HSS so HSS must be able to
authenticate ICN capable UE and authorize create session [TS23.401].
Anchorless mobility [ALM] has made some important comments on how
mobility management is done in ICN. Author comments about handling
mobility without having a dependency on the core network function
e.g. MME. However, location update to the core network would still be
required to support some of the legal compliance requirements such as
lawful intercept and emergency services.
The main advantage of ICN is in caching and reusing the content,
which does not apply to the transactional signaling exchange. After
analyzing LTE signaling call-flows [TS23.401] and messages inter-
dependencies [Fig 4], our recommendation is that it is not beneficial
to deploy ICN for control plane and mobility management functions.
5.2 Recommendations in the User Plane
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
We will consider figure 1 to discuss different mechanisms to deploy
ICN in mobile networks. We consider the following options:
1. Dual stack ICN deployment in UE
2. Native ICN Deployments in UE
3. ICN Deployment in eNodeB
4. ICN Deployment in mobile gateways (SGW/PGW)
5.2.1 Dual stack ICN Deployments in UE
The control and user plane communications in LTE, 4G mobile networks
are specified in 3GPP documents [TS23.323] [TS23.203] [TS23.401]. It
is important to understand that UE can be either consumer (receiving
content) or publisher (pushing content for other clients). The
protocol stack inside mobile device (UE) is complex as it has to
support multiple radio connectivity access to eNodeB(s).
Figure 5 below provides high level description of protocol stack,
where IP is defined at two layers: (1) at user plane communication,
(2) Transport layer. User plane communication takes place between
Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) and Application layer,
whereas transport layer is at GTP protocol stack.
+--------+ +--------+
| App | | CDN |
+--------+ +--------+ +--------+
|Transp. | | | | |Transp. | | |Transp. |
|Selector|.|..............|...............|.|Selector|.|.|Selector|
+--------+ | | | +--------+ | +--------+
| |.|..............|...............|.| |.|.| |
| ICN/IP | | | | | ICN/IP | | | ICN/IP|
| | | | | | | | | |
+--------+ | +----+-----+ | +-----+-----+ | +-----+--+ | +--------+
| |.|.| | |.|.| | |.|.| | | | | |
| PDCP | | |PDCP|GTP-U| | |GTP-U|GTP-U| | |GTP-U| | | | L2 |
+--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +-----+ | | | |
| RLC |.|.|RLC | UDP |.|.| UDP | UDP |.|.|UDP |L2|.|.| |
+--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +-----+ | | | |
| MAC |.|.| MAC| L2 |.|.| L2 | L2 |.|.| L2 | | | | |
+--------+ | +----------+ | +-----------+ | +--------+ | +--------+
| L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 |L1|.|.| L1 |
+--------+ | +----+-----+ | +-----+-----+ | +-----+--+ | +--------+
UE | BS(enodeB) | SGW | PGW |
Uu S1U S5/S8 SGi
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
Fig. 5. Dual stack ICN Deployment in UE
The protocol interactions and impact of supporting tunneling of ICN
packet into IP or to support ICN natively are described in figure 6
and figure 7 respectively.
The protocols and software stack used inside LTE capable UE support
both 3G and LTE software interworking and handover. Latest 3GPP
Rel.13 onward specification describe the use of IP and non-IP
protocols to establish logical/session connectivity. We intend to
leverage the non-IP protocol based mechanism to deploy ICN protocol
stack in UE as well as in eNodeB and mobile gateways (SGW, PGW).
+-----------------------------------+
| Applications (existing) |
+-----------------------------------+
|
+-----------------------------------+
| Transport Selector (new) |
+-----------------------------------+
| |
+-------------+ +-------------+
|ICN function +-------+ IP function |
| (New) | | (Existing) |
+-------------+ +-------------+
| (native) | (overlay)
+-----------------------------------+
| PDCP (updated to support ICN) |
+-----------------------------------+
|
+-----------------------------------+
| RLC (Existing) |
+-----------------------------------+
|
+-----------------------------------+
| MAC Layer (Existing) |
+-----------------------------------+
|
+-----------------------------------+
| Physical L1 (Existing) |
+-----------------------------------+
Fig. 6. Dual stack ICN protocol interactions
1. Application layer has the option of selecting either ICN or IP
transport layer as well as the radio interface to send and
receive data traffic. Our proposal is to provide a common
Application Programming Interface (API) to the application
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
developers such that there is no impact on the application
development when they choose either ICN or IP transport for
exchanging the traffic with the network. We introduce a
transport selector function to handle the interaction of
application with the multiple transport options.
2. The transport selector helps determine what type of transport
(e.g. ICN or IP) as well as type of radio interface (e.g. LTE
or WiFi or both) is used to send and receive the traffic.
Application layer can make the decision to select a specific
transport based on preference e.g. content location, content
type, content publisher, congestion, cost, quality of service
etc. There can be an Application Programming Interface (API) to
exchange parameters required for transport selection. The
southbound interactions of Transport Selector will be either to
IP or ICN at network layer.
3. ICN function (forwarder) is introduced in parallel to the
existing IP layer. ICN forwarder contains functional
capabilities to forward ICN packets, e.g. Interest packet to
eNodeB or response "data packet" from eNodeB to the
application.
4. For dual stack scenario, when UE is not supporting ICN at
transport layer, we use IP underlay to transport ICN packets.
ICN function will use IP interface to send Interest and Data
packets for fetching or sending data using ICN protocol
function. This interface will use ICN overlay over IP using any
overlay tunneling mechanism.
5. To support ICN at network layer in UE, PDCP layer has to be
aware of ICN capabilities and parameters. PDCP is located in
the Radio Protocol Stack in the LTE Air interface, between IP
(Network layer) and Radio Link Control Layer (RLC). PDCP
performs following functions [TS36.323]:
a) Data transport by listening to upper layer, formatting and
pushing down to Radio Link Layer (RLC)
b) Header compression and decompression using ROHC (Robust
Header Compression)
c) Security protections such as ciphering, deciphering and
integrity protection
d) Radio layer messages associated with sequencing, packet drop
detection and re-transmission etc.
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
6. No changes are required for lower layer such as RLC, MAC and
Physical (L1) because they are not IP aware.
One key point to understand in this scenario is that ICN is deployed
as an overlay on top of IP.
5.2.2 Native ICN Deployments in UE
We propose to implement ICN natively in UE by modifying PDCP layer in
3GPP protocols. Figure 7 below provides a high level protocol stack
description where ICN is used at two different layers:
1. at user plane communication
2. at transport layer
User plane communication takes place between PDCP and application
layer, whereas transport layer is a substitute of GTP protocol.
Removal of GTP protocol stack is significant change in mobile
architecture because GTP is used not just for routing but for
mobility management functions such as billing, mediation, policy
enforcement etc.
+--------+ +--------+
| App | | CDN |
+--------+ +--------+
|Transp. | | | | | |Transp. |
|Selector|.|..............|..............|..............|.|Selector|
+--------+ | | | | +--------+
| |.|..............|..............|..............|.| |
| ICN/IP | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
+--------+ | +----+-----+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | | ICN/IP |
| |.|.| | | | | | | | | | | |
| PDCP | | |PDCP| ICN |.|.| ICN |.|.| ICN |.|.| |
+--------+ | +----+ | | | | | | | | | |
| RLC |.|.|RLC | | | | | | | | | | |
+--------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +--------+
| MAC |.|.| MAC| L2 |.|.| L2 |.|.| L2 |.|.| L2 |
+--------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +--------+
| L1 |.|.| L1 | L1 |.|.| L1 |.|.| L1 |.|.| L1 |
+--------+ | +----+-----+ | +----------+ | +----------+ | +--------+
UE | BS(enodeB) | SGW | PGW |
Uu S1u S5/S8 SGi
Fig. 7. Native ICN Deployment in UE
If we implement ICN natively in UE, communication between UE and
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
eNodeB will change and also we will not need to tunnel user plane
traffic from eNodeB to mobile packet core (SGW, PGW) using GTP
tunnel.
For native ICN deployment, Application is configured to use ICN
forwarder so there is no need for Transport Selector. Also to support
ICN at network layer in UE, we need to modify existing PDCP layer.
PDCP layer has to be aware of ICN capabilities and parameters.
Native implementation will also provide opportunities to develop new
use cases leveraging ICN capabilities such as seamless mobility, UE
to UE content delivery using radio network without interactions with
mobile gateways, etc.
5.2.3 ICN Deployment in eNodeB
eNodeB is physical point of attachment for UE, where radio protocols
are converted into IP transport protocol as depicted in figure 6 and
figure 7 for dual stack/overlay and native ICN respectively. When UE
performs attach procedures, it is assigned an identity either as IP,
dual stack (IP and ICN), or ICN. UE can initiate data traffic using
any of three different options:
1. Native IP (IPv4 or IPv6)
2. Native ICN
3. Dual stack IP (IPv4/IPv6) or ICN
UE encapsulates user data transport request into PDCP layer as
described in section 5.2.1 and send the information on air interface
to eNodeB. eNodeB receives the information and using PDCP [TS
36.323], de-encapsulate air-interface messages and convert them to
forward to core mobile gateways (SGW, PGW). In order to support ICN
natively in eNodeB, it is proposed to provide transport selector
capabilities in eNodeB (similar as provided in UE), which provides
following functions:
1. It decides the forwarding strategy for user data request coming
from UE. The strategy can make decision based on preference
indicated by the application such as, congestion, cost, quality
of service, etc.
2. eNodeB to provide open Application Programming Interface (API)
to external management systems to provide programming
capability to eNodeB to program the forwarding strategies.
3. eNodeB shall be upgraded to support three different types of
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
transport IP, ICN, and dual stack IP+ICN towards mobile
gateways, as depicted in figure 8. It is also recommended to
deploy IP and/or ICN forwarding capabilities into eNodeB for
efficient transfer of data between eNodeB and mobile gateways.
There can be four choices for forwarding data request towards
mobile gateways:
a) Assuming eNodeB is IP enabled and UE requests for IP
transfer, eNodeB forwards data over IP.
b) Assuming eNodeB is ICN enabled and UE request for ICN
transfer, eNodeB forwards data over ICN.
c) Assuming eNodeB is IP enabled and UE request ICN, eNodeB
overlays ICN on IP and forwards the user plane traffic over
IP.
d) Assuming eNodeB is ICN enabled and UE request IP, eNodeB
overlays IP on ICN and forwards the user plane traffic over
ICN [IPoICN].
+---------------+ |
| UE request | | ICN +---------+
+---> | content using |--+--- transport -->| |
| |ICN protocol | | | |
| +---------------+ | | |
| | | |
| +---------------+ | | |
+-+ | | UE request | | IP |To mobile|
| |---+---> | content using |--+--- transport -->| GW |
+-+ | | IP protocol | | |(SGW,PGW)|
UE | +---------------+ | | |
| | | |
| +---------------+ | | |
| | UE request | | Dual stack | |
+---> | content using |--+--- IP+ICN -->| |
|IP/ICN protocol| | transport +---------+
+---------------+ |
eNodeB S1u
Fig. 8. Native ICN Deployment in eNodeB
5.2.4 ICN Deployment in Packet Core (SGW, PGW) Gateways
Mobile gateways a.k.a. Evolved Packet Core (EPC) include SGW, PGW,
which performs session management for UE from the initial attach to
disconnection. When UE is powered on, it performs NAS signaling and
after successful authentication it attaches to PGW. PGW is an
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
anchoring point for UE and responsible for service creations,
authorization, maintenance etc. Entire functionality is managed using
IP address(es) for UE.
In order to implement ICN in EPC, the following functions are needed.
1. Insert ICN function at session management layer as additional
functionality with IP stack. Session management layer is used
for performing attach procedures and assigning logical identity
to user. After successful authentication by HSS, MME sends
create session request (CSR) to SGW and SGW to PGW.
2. When MME sends Create Session Request message (step-12 in
[TS23.401]) to SGW or PGW, it contains Protocol Configuration
Option Information Element (PCO IE) containing UE capabilities.
We can use PCO IE to carry ICN related capabilities information
from UE to PGW. This information is received from UE during
initial attach request in MME. Details of available TLV which
can be used for ICN are given in subsequent sections. UE can
support either native IP, or ICN+IP, or native ICN. IP is
referred to as both IPv4 and IPv6 protocols.
3. For ICN+IP capable UE, PGW assigns the UE both IP address and
ICN identity. UE selects the either of the identities during
initial attach procedures and registers with network for
session management. For ICN capable UE it will provide only ICN
attachment. For native IP capable UE there is no change.
4. In order to support ICN capable attach procedures and use ICN
for user plane traffic, PGW needs to have full ICN protocol
stack functionalities. Typical ICN capabilities include
functions such as content store (CS), Pending Interest Table
(PIT), Forwarding Information Base (FIB) capabilities etc. If
UE requests ICN in PCO IE, then PGW registers UE with ICN
names. For ICN forwarding, PGW caches content locally using CS
functionality.
5. Protocol configuration options information elements described
in [TS24.008] (see Figure 10.5.136 on page 598) and [TS24.008]
(see Table 10.5.154 on page 599) provide details for different
fields.
- Octet 3 (configuration protocols defines PDN types) which
contains details about IPv4, IPv6, both or ICN.
- Any combination of Octet 4 to Z can be used to provide
additional information related to ICN capability. It is most
important that PCO IE parameters are matched between UE and
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
mobile gateways (SGW, PGW) so that they can be interpreted
properly and UE can attach successfully.
6. Deployment of ICN functionalities in SGW and PGW should be
matched with UE and eNodeB because they will exchange ICN
protocols and parameters.
7. Mobile gateways SGW, PGW will also need ICN forwarding and
caching capability.
6. Security Considerations
To ensure only authenticated UEs are connected to the network, LTE
mobile network implements various security mechanisms. From
perspective of ICN deployment in user plane, it need to take care of
following security aspects:
1. UE authentication and authorization
2. Radio or air interface security
3. Denial of service attacks on mobile gateway, services
4. Content positioning either in transport or servers
5. Content cache pollution attacks
6. Secure naming, routing, and forwarding
7. Application security
Security over the LTE air interface is provided through cryptographic
technique. When UE is powered-up it performs key exchange between
UE's USIM and HSS/Authentication Center using NAS messages including
ciphering and integrity protections between UE and MME. Details of
security UE authentication, key exchange, ciphering and integrity
protections message are given in 3GPP call flow [TS23.401].
LTE is an all IP network and uses IP transport in its mobile backhaul
(e.g. between eNodeB and core network). In case of provider owned
backhaul, it may not implement security mechanisms; however, they are
necessary in case it uses shared or a leased network. The native IP
transport continue to leverage security mechanism such as Internet
key exchange (IKE) and the IP security protocol (IPsec). More details
of mobile backhaul security are provided in 3GPP network security
[TS33.310] and [TS33.320]. When mobile backhaul is upgraded to
support dual stack (IP+ICN) or native ICN, it is required to
implement security techniques which are deployed in mobile backhaul.
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
When ICN forwarding is enabled on mobile transport routers, we need
to deploy security practices based on RFC7476 and RFC7927.
Some of the key functions supported by LTE mobile gateway (SGW, PGW)
are content based billing, deep packet inspection (DPI), lawful
intercept (LI). For ICN based user plane traffic, it is required to
integrate ICN security for session between UE and gateway; however,
in ICN network, since only consumers are in possession of decryption
keys can access the content, some of the services provided mobile
gateway mentioned above may not work. Further research in this area
is needed.
7. Summary
Authors have discussed complexities of LTE network and key
dependencies for deploying ICN in user plane data transport.
Different deployment options described covers aspects such as inter-
operability and multi-technology, which is a reality for any service
provider. The ICN deployment options described in section 5, we
currently evaluating using LTE gateway software and ICN simulator.
One can deploy ICN for data transport in user plane either as an
overlay, dual stack (IP + ICN) or natively (by integrating ICN with
CDN, eNodeB, SGW, PGW and transport network etc.). It is important to
understand that for the actual deployment scenarios, additional
research study is required to identify dependencies specific to a
mobile network.
As far as control plane signaling is concerned, our observation is
that further research is required to understand the benefits of using
ICN to complement or replace traditional control plane signaling. As
a starting step towards ICN deployment, it is recommended that the
focus should be on enhancement of user data plane.
Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) [CHENG] provides capabilities to deploy
functionalities such as content data Network (CDN) caching and mobile
user plane functions (UPF) [TS23.501]. Recent research for delivering
real-time video content using ICN has also been proven to be
efficient [NDNRTC] and we can be used towards realizing the benefits
of ICN deployment in eNodeB, MEC, mobile gateways (SGW, PGW) and CDN.
The key aspect for ICN is in its seamless integration in LTE and 5G
networks with tangible benefits so that we can optimize content
delivery using simple and scalable architecture. Authors will
continue to explore how the ICN forwarding in MEC could be used in
efficient delivery of unicast and multicast traffic.
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
7 References
7.1 Normative References
[GRAYSON] Grayson M, Shatzkamer K, Wainner S.; Cisco Press book "IP
Design for Mobile Networks" by. page 108-112.
[IPSEC1] Cisco IPSec overhead calculator tool
<https://cway.cisco.com/tools/ipsec-overhead-calc/ipsec-
overhead-calc.html>.
[IPSEC2] IPSec Bandwidth Overhead Using AES
<http://packetpushers.net/ipsec-bandwidth-overhead-using-
aes/>.
[BROWER] Brower, E.; Jeffress, L.; Pezeshki, J.; Jasani, R.;
Ertekin, E. "Integrating Header Compression with IPsec",
Military Communications Conference, 2006. MILCOM 2006.
IEEE, On page(s): 1 - 6.
[TS25.323] 3GPP TS25.323 Rel. 14 (2017-03) Packet Data Convergence
Protocol (PDCP) specification.
[TS23.501] 3GPP TS23.501 Rel. 15 (2017-06) System Architecture for
the 5G System.
[TS23.203] 3GPP TS23.203 Rel. 14 (2017-03) Policy and charging
control and QoS architecture
[TS23.401] 3GPP TS23.401 Rel. 14 (2017-03) E-UTRAN Access procedures
architecture
[TS33.310] 3GPP TS33.310 Rel. 14 (2016-12) LTE Network Domain
Security (NDS); Authentication Framework (AF)
[TS33.320] 3GPP TS33.320 Rel. 14 (2016-12) Security of Home Node B
(HNB) / Home evolved Node B (HeNB)
[TS24.008] 3GPP TS24.008 Rel. 14 (2017-06) Mobile radio interface
Layer 3 specification.
[TS23.501] 3GPP TS23.501 Rel. 14 (2017-06) System Architecture for
the 5G System
[TS23.214] 3GPP TS23.214 Rel. 14 (2017-06) Architecture enhancements
for control and user plane separation of EPC nodes
[TS36.323] 3GPP TS36.323 Rel. 14 (2017-06) Evolved Universal
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Packet Data Convergence
Protocol (PDCP) specification
[RFC7476] Information-Centric Networking: Baseline Scenarios
[RFC7927] Information-Centric Networking (ICN) Research Challenges
7.2 Informative References
[MECSPEC] European Telecommunication Standards Institute (ETSI) MEC
specification ETSI-GS-MEC-IEG-001 V1.1.1 (2015-11).
[NDNTLV] NDN Interest Packet Format Specification 0.2-2.
https://named-data. net/doc/ndn-tlv/interest.html.
[CCNxTLV] CCNx Messages in TLV Format
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-icnrg-
ccnxmessages/
[NDNPUB] Named Data Networking <http://named-
data.net/publications/>.
[CCN] Content Centric Networking <http://www.ccnx.org and
http://blogs.parc.com/ccnx/documentation-guide/>.
[NDN] Lixia Z., Lan W. et al. SIGCOMM Named Data Networking
[ALM] J. Aug'e, G. Carofiglio et al. "Anchor-less producer
mobility in icn," in Proceedings of the 2Nd ACM Conference
on Information-Centric Networking, ACM-ICN '15, pp. 189-
190, ACM, 2015.
[VNIIDX] Cisco Visual Networking Index (VNI) dated 16 Feb 2016,
<http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/service-
provider/visual-networking-index-vni/index.html>.
[NDNRTC] Peter Gusev,Zhehao Wang, Jeff Burke, Lixia Zhang et. All,
IEICE Trans Communication, RealtimeStreaming Data Delivery
over Named Data Networking, Vol E99-B, No.5 May 2016.
[CHENG] Chengchao L., F. Richard Yu, Information-centric network
fucntion virtualization over 5G mobile wireless networks,
IEEE network (Volume:29, Issue:3), page 68-74, 01 June
2015.
[NGMN] Backhaul Provisioning for LTE-Advanced & Small Cells
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Deploying ICN in 4G, LTE Mobile Networks July 02 2017
<https://www.ngmn.org/uploads/media/150929_NGMN_P-
SmallCells_Backhaul_for_LTE-Advanced_and_Small_Cells.pdf>
[IPoICN] IP Over ICN - The Better IP?
<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=7194109>
Authors' Addresses
Prakash Suthar
9501 Technology Blvd.
Rosemont, Illinois 50618
EMail: psuthar@cisco.com
Milan Stolic
9501 Technology Blvd.
Rosemont, Illinois 50618
EMail: mistolic@cisco.com
Anil Jangam
3625 Cisco Way
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: anjangam@cisco.com
Prakash, et.al. Expires January 3, 2018 [Page 23]