Internet DRAFT - draft-schott-fmc-requirements
draft-schott-fmc-requirements
FMC Working Group S. Durel
Internet-Draft France Telecom
Intended status: Informational H. Moustafa
Expires: April 25, 2013 Intel Corporation
R. Schott
Deutsche Telekom
October 22, 2012
Requirements in Fixed Mobile Convergence
draft-schott-fmc-requirements-04
Abstract
This document provides provides technical requirements in Fixed
Mobile Convergence for the two use cases of group identification and
user equipment mobility in fixed network.
Requirements Language
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].
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2013.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 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
Durel, et al. Expires April 25, 2013 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft FMC use case October 2012
(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
2. Use case 1: Group Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Use case 2: Requirements for UE Mobility in Fixed
Broadband Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Durel, et al. Expires April 25, 2013 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft FMC use case October 2012
1. Introduction
In the FMC (fix/mobile convergence) network, the major convergenced
aspects include the converged business and service, converged network
and infrustructure, and converged user management and terminals
[TR203].
With network heterogeneity and huge demand of multimedia and audio-
visual services and applications as a given, users' satisfaction is
the aim of each service provider to reduce churn, promote new
services and improve the ARPU (Average Revenue per User). The market
is crowded. Many players provide Internet and entertainment
services, which motivates new business models considering users'
experience and considering roaming agreement between different
operators. New expectation for users' consumption style focuses on
personalized and interactive usage. This allows users on one hand to
share content across many devices and with other users, but on the
other hand to access all content seamlessly at the touch of a button.
The converged business will provide the customer with a uniform
policy and user experience. It can be seamlessly and intuitively
accessible across all devices and all networks. The converged
network and infrustructure will reduce the CAPEX and OPEX for
operators, and incur minimal additional costs with the ever-changing
business model. The converged user management and terminals will
offer a more simple and convenient user experience, which will
deliver broadband connectivity and standardized multimedia services
to a wide range of devices, including media servers, video cameras,
portable media players, PCs and mobile phones [TS23.203].
The purpose of this document is to provide some technical
requirements specific to FMC scenario. It can be regarded as a
motivation to encouraging standardization work in IETF in those
areas.
2. Use case 1: Group Identification
The goal of our model is to enforce certain unified policy control
for consumer's service by means of grouping the consumer's devices
for management. This enforcement allows control over the subscriber
level who can share the subscription among several devices. This
group can be configured in the subscription server of the operator.
This device group for subscriber management could be defined as
subscriber ID.
Subscriber ID used for unified service management can be constructed
based on the requirements of:
Durel, et al. Expires April 25, 2013 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft FMC use case October 2012
1. Subscriber ID is assigned by the ICP/ISP or operators, and
2. Subscriber ID determine which traffic policy such as QoS are
enforced by the nodes inside the network, and
3. Subscriber ID could be configured in the subscription server of
the operator or ICP/ISP, and
4. Subscriber ID is combined with the subscriber information.
5. Subscriber ID may correspond to the device identifiers, such as
ISIM, etc. And the ID should be kept unchanged in the Carrier Grade
Network Address Translation (CGN) devices.
The rules of this ID could be set through administrative rules, which
is out the scope of this document. The devices of the consumer and
the operator must have the consistent ID for the same management
group. A differentiated service-compliant network node can provide
differentiated policy enforcement and packet scheduling mechanism
based on this kind of ID.
Consider an ISP assign a subscriber-id to the customer, the customer
can not only use this subscriber-id to access the network, but also
use some applications (operator's service or third-party service)
without additional appliance or authentication.
One subscriber may have multiple devices, including PC, mobile
phones, ipad, etc., and may seamlessly move across multiple
heterogeneous networks. With this unified user Identication, the
customer can log in different application systems with a single
access control. Besides, operators and Content providers can also
apply the unified access policy, accounting policy, etc., to the
customer for the specific set of devices.
Potencial Technical Issues:
Two different types of identifiers play an important role in this
case: Device Identifier and Subscriber Identifier. The Device
Identifier is used to indicate each individual devices for the
customer, and the Subscriber Identifier is used to indicate a
customer under the same policy, e.g. accouting policy, priority
profile, etc. One Subscriber Identifier may correspdent to multiple
Devices Identifiers. These Identifiers should be kept unchanged in
the CGNs.
Durel, et al. Expires April 25, 2013 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft FMC use case October 2012
3. Use case 2: Requirements for UE Mobility in Fixed Broadband Network
Regarding the requirements for MN (Mobile Node) mobility in fixed
broadband networks two use cases can be distinguished. One is the
mobility between different access technologies e.g. WiFi and 3 GPP
access and the other is the mobility in a WiFi scenario.
Customer service should be guanranted during the switch between one
access network to another. For example, customer's call or video
service shouldn't be interrupted when moving from 3GPP access to WiFi
access techonology. The services depend on the substantive of
customer's profile and it is important to confirm the device
identification binding or updated accordingly for the same moving
device.
The following are the requirements for the User Equipment Mobility in
Fixed Broadband Network:
- Handover between networks while the session is active according to
the network status with the change in the MN attachment.
- Mechanisms and interfaces between operators or/and access networks
SHOULD be deployed to manage the mobility of the traffic flows of
their users.
- Mobility should be enabled whether or not coverage areas overlap.
- Differentiated Services for the mobile device (MN)
- Service guarantee when device is roaming or mobile
- Resiliency in the network nodes should be provided
Potential Technical Issues:
The potential issues for the mobility use case is device
identification suitable for mobility requirements, IP address
reserved techonology, QoS or UE information communication between
different access networks, mobility technology in WiFi scenario.
4. IANA Considerations
5. Security Considerations
This document focuses on FMC requirements and the interworking of
"WiFi, 3G, etc..." and should not give rise to any new security
Durel, et al. Expires April 25, 2013 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft FMC use case October 2012
vulnerabilities beyond those described in IPSec [RFC4301], TLS
[RFC5246] or SRTP [RFC3711]. Nevertheless an open network
architecture aimed at fulfilling the requirements listed in this
document may give rise to security issues not yet identified.
6. Acknowledgements
TBD
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768,
August 1980.
[RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[TS23.203]
"3GPP TS23.203, Policy and Charging control architecture",
September 2012.
7.2. Informative References
[TR203] "Broadband Forum Technical Report TR-203, Interworking
between Next Generation Fixed and 3GPP Wireless Access",
August 2012.
Authors' Addresses
Sophie Durel
France Telecom
Rennes, 35000
France
Phone:
Email: sophie.durel@orange.com
Durel, et al. Expires April 25, 2013 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft FMC use case October 2012
Hassnaa Moustafa
Intel Corporation
Hillsboro, OR,
United States
Phone:
Email: hassnaa.moustafa@intel.com
Roland Schott
Deutsche Telekom
Darmstadt, 64295
Germany
Phone:
Email: Roland.Schott@telekom.de
Durel, et al. Expires April 25, 2013 [Page 7]
