ave driven mobile operators to evaluate solutions to offload the bulk or low profit (Internet) traffic to alternative access technologies that are cheaper to deploy in dense hotspot areas and ideally would use 'someone else's' backhaul. There has been a vision of using managed WLAN deployments or subscribers' home WLANs as alternative accesses. We can identify two main motivations: Compensate the cellular radio coverage and access capacity with a cheaper radio technology in a dense hotspot area while still routing the traffic through the operator's packet core. Bypass the operator's packet core, cellular access, and possibly backhaul, completely to maximize 'savings'. This is our main target scenario in this chapter. The development of UEs strengthens these IP offloading visions, since effectively all high-end and most mid-range UEs have a WLAN support. There are few issues left though. First, a UE may not be operating multiple radios simultaneously, which effectively prohibits selective offloading of IP traffic between access technologies. In this book, we Future of IPv6 in 3GPP Networks assume that a UE can operate multiple radios in parallel. Second, how to determine which IP traffic to offload and which traffic to route through the mobile operator's core. Third, how to steer the offloading decision making from the network side. This can be challenging, especially in the case of Split-UEs. Fourth, how to minimize the impact on the operator network and especially in the UE. 6.1.2 Benefits of IPv6-based Offloading Approaches The main benefits of IPv6 offloading approaches can be categorized as follows: System-agnostic standardization: Layer 3 based offloading solution by definition is agnostic of layers 2 and 1, and hence IPv6-based offloading solutions allow easy deployment and utilization on various access technologies. Prefix-based policies: Offloading policies using IPv6 prefixes, the fewer and the shorter prefixes the better, is reliable and doable with low management burden. Effectively, the IPv6 offloadin