Hi Folks,
I am attaching the draft I wrote regarding this. Can you please comment.
Thanks
Suresh
Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:
Correct. That is NOT the issue. 3041 and 3041 bis use "randomly"
generated identifiers that are "local" (not "global" as mac-derived
identifiers are) and there are some RFCs that RESERVE certain ranges
within this "local" space. We need some place to document that list of
reserved ranges so that a "randomly" generated identifiers don't use
those reserved ranges. Any future assignment of reserved local
identifiers always run the risk of having existing implementations
generate identifiers that may conflict.
- Bernie
-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Huitema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:38 AM
To: Suresh Krishnan
Cc: Alexandru Petrescu; ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Reserved interface identifier registry
Not really. You are assuming here that all IIDs are generated from MAC
addresses. IIDs can be generated using other methods like CGA, Privacy
Addresses etc. Hence reserving a range of MACs/OUIs is not sufficient.
Actually, the non Mac derived identifier include a bit that indicate
that "this is not a reserved value", and thus don't conflict with
MAC-derived identifiers.
-- Christian Huitema
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Network Working Group S. Krishnan
Internet-Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Standards Track March 20, 2007
Expires: September 21, 2007
Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers
draft-krishnan-ipv6-reserved-iids
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 21, 2007.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
Abstract
Interface Identifiers in IPv6 unicast addresses are used to identify
interfaces on a link. They are required to be unique within a
subnet. Several RFCs have specified interface identifiers or
identifier ranges that have a special meaning attached to them. An
IPv6 node autoconfiguring an interface identifier in these ranges
will encounter unexpected consequences. Since there is no
centralized repository for such reserved identifiers, this document
aims to create one.
Table of Contents
1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Issues with reusing reserved Interface Identifiers . . . . . . 5
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 10
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
1. Requirements notation
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 [RFC2119].
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
2. Introduction
An IPv6 unicast address is composed of two parts. A subnet prefix
and an interface identifier (IID) that identifies an unique interface
within the subnet prefix. The structure of an IPv6 unicast address
is depicted in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture [RFC4291] and is
replicated here for clarity.
| n bits | 128-n bits |
+------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| subnet prefix | interface ID |
+------------------------------------------------+----------------+
Figure 1: IPv6 Unicast Address Format
For all unicast addresses, except those that start with binary value
000, Interface identifiers are required to be 64 bits long (i.e.
n==64) . If the interface identifiers are generated from an unique
token like an ethernet MAC address, they need to set bit 6 of the
first octet to one. If they are not generated from an unique token
they need to set bit 6 to zero. Examples of mechanisms that generate
interface identifiers without an unique token include
Cryptographically Generated Addresses [RFC3972], Privacy Addresses
[PRIVACY], Hash Based Addresses [HBA] etc. Non-unique interface
identifiers can also be allocated using managed address assignment
mechanisms like DHCPv6 [RFC3315].
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
3. Issues with reusing reserved Interface Identifiers
Let us assume a node comes up with an interface identifier that has
been reserved for use in some other capacity. e.g. An IPv6 node that
uses temporary IPv6 addresses [PRIVACY] comes up with an IID of fdff:
ffff:ffff:fffe . This node will receive requests from all nodes that
are requesting a service from a MobileIPv6 home agent. At best this
is an annoyance to the node that came up with this address. In the
worst case scenario another node on the link would be denied service
and may not look for other methods of acquiring a home agent.
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
4. IANA Considerations
This document requests the creation of an IANA registry for reserved
IPv6 Interface Identifiers. Initial values for the reserved IPv6
Interface Identifiers are given below.
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Interface Identifier Range | Description |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| 0000:0000:0000:0000-0000:0000:0000:0000 | Subnet Router Anycast |
| | [RFC4291] |
| | |
| 0000:5efe:0000:0000-0000:5efe:ffff:ffff | ISATAP [RFC4214] |
| | |
| fdff:ffff:ffff:ff80-fdff:ffff:ffff:fffd | Reserved Subnet Anycast |
| | [RFC2526] |
| | |
| fdff:ffff:ffff:fffe-fdff:ffff:ffff:fffe | MobileIPv6 Home Agents |
| | Anycast [RFC2526] |
| | |
| fdff:ffff:ffff:ffff-fdff:ffff:ffff:ffff | Reserved Subnet Anycast |
| | [RFC2526] |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
Table 1: Current Assignments
It is possible that implementations might predate a specific
assignment from this registry and hence not be cognizant of the
reserved nature of the interface identifier. Hence. future
assignments from this registry are discouraged but in exceptional
circumstances are to be made through Expert Review [IANABIS].
Assignments consist of a single interface identifier or a range of
interface identifiers.
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
5. Security Considerations
Information that creates or updates a registration needs to be
authenticated and authorized. By utilizing one of the reserved
interface identifiers an IPv6 node might receive requests that it is
not authorized to receive.
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2526] Johnson, D. and S. Deering, "Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast
Addresses", RFC 2526, March 1999.
[RFC4214] Templin, F., Gleeson, T., Talwar, M., and D. Thaler,
"Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol
(ISATAP)", RFC 4214, October 2005.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
6.2. Informative References
[HBA] Bagnulo, M., "Hash Based Addresses (HBA)",
draft-ietf-shim6-hba-02 (work in progress), October 2006.
[IANABIS] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs",
draft-narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis-05 (work in
progress), September 2006.
[PRIVACY] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in
IPv6", draft-ietf-ipv6-privacy-addrs-v2-05 (work in
progress), October 2006.
[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
[RFC3972] Aura, T., "Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)",
RFC 3972, March 2005.
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
Author's Address
Suresh Krishnan
Ericsson
8400 Decarie Blvd.
Town of Mount Royal, QC
Canada
Phone: +1 514 345 7900 x42871
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers March 2007
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Krishnan Expires September 21, 2007 [Page 10]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
