s to define a backward compatible approach to implementing a new style 3GPP evolved bearer that supports both multiple IPv6 prefixes and next-hop routers. Multiple next-hop routers imply the possibility of achieving local breakout for the traffic, and letting the address selection in the UE make the decision where to send packets based on the router preferences and more specific routes received from the network. The impact of the evolved bearer on the existing 3GPP architecture was also presented. The next topic concerned residential home networks that make extensive use of IPv6. Our motivation on this topic was the envisioned development where the cellular con- nectivity eventually replaces wired connectivity to home networks and their CPEs. We looked into issues originating from the 3GPP connectivity model and the current IPv6 address management. Possible solution approaches that make use of both standardized and non-standard features of the 3GPP packet core were discussed and presented. In this chapter we also introduced PCP, which is currently in the final stages of stan- dardization in IETF, and already being proposed for 3GPP adoption. The PCP may find its way into future 3GPP deployments, as the developments in 3GPP networks and UEs are heading exactly towards the main use cases of PCP. NATs, both NAT44 and NAT64, are increasingly making their way into 3GPP networks and at the same time a class of UEs is being used as home CPEs and handset types of UEs are going to great lengths to conserve power. The PCP can help in both cases: for CPE type of UEs PCP provides facilities to convert UPnP and NAT-PMP protocols of the home network to protocol understood by the NAT at the operator network, and for handsets PCP provides a means to reduce keep-alive signaling and hence decrease energy consumption. However, the history of protocols designed for hosts to control core network elements has not been successful. It remains to be seen whether PCP will be adopted by the market on a large scale. We discussed the strong 