Expanding the IPv6 Lab Use Space
draft-horley-v6ops-lab-01
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 "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Ed Horley , Tom Coffeen , Scott Hogg , Nick Buraglio , Chris Cummings , Kevin Myers , Russ White | ||
| Last updated | 2021-07-27 | ||
| 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-horley-v6ops-lab-01
Network Working Group E. Horley
Internet-Draft T. Coffeen
Intended status: Informational S. Hogg
Expires: January 28, 2022 HexaBuild
N. Buraglio
C. Cummings
Energy Sciences Network
K. Myers
IP ArchiTechs
R. White
Juniper Networks
July 27, 2021
Expanding the IPv6 Lab Use Space
draft-horley-v6ops-lab-01
Abstract
To reduce the likelihood of addressing conflicts and confusion
between lab deployments and non-lab (i.e., production) deployments,
an IPv6 unicast address prefix is reserved for use in lab, proof-of-
concept, and validation networks as well as for for any similar use
case. This document describes the use of the IPv6 address prefix
0200::/7 as a prefix reserved for this purpose (repurposing the
deprecated OSI NSAP-mapped prefix).
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 https://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 January 28, 2022.
Horley, et al. Expires January 28, 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Expanding the IPv6 Lab Use Space July 2021
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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
(https://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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. New Lab IPv6 Address Prefix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Operational Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1. Introduction
The address architecture for IPv6 ([RFC4291]) does not explicitly
define any prefixes allocated exclusively for lab use, nor is such
address space allocated in [RFC6890] or in [RFC8200]. While lab
deployments could potentially use IPv6 address prefixes typically
assigned and configured in non-lab network, the use of such
addressing in lab environments may create addressing conflicts and
operational confusion. For instance, designing labs utilizing ULA
fc00::/7 [RFC4193] is problematic due to the random global ID
requirement preventing hierarchical network prefix design
possibilities. Further, default address selection behavior [RFC6724]
by end nodes may result in a depreferencing of such addresses and
prevent lab deployments from accurately modeling their desired non-
lab equivalents.
To resolve these problems involved in building large scale lab
networks, and pre-staging, or automating large-scale networks for
deployment, this document allocates the IPv6 address prefix 0200::/7
for these purposes.
Horley, et al. Expires January 28, 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Expanding the IPv6 Lab Use Space July 2021
The goal is to allow organization to share working lab configuration
files (with little or no need of modification) to be deployed in a
third party lab environment like,
public and private clouds,
virtualization or hosting environments,
and in other networks like Service Providers, Enterprise, Government,
IoT, and Energy,
all with the knowledge that the lab GUA address space will perform
the same as any GUA but with the added knowledge that filtering will
be used to protect accidential leaks to the Internet.
The following criteria is for selecting the lab prefix:
The precendence for the lab prefix should no be lower than the GUA
prefix as defined in [RFC6724] (unlike ULA). Reduce the operational
impacts to IANA and the RIR's in selecting lab prefix space.
2. New Lab IPv6 Address Prefix
The prefix reserved for lab and testing purposes is 0200::/7.
3. Operational Implications
This space SHOULD NOT be employed for addressing use cases which are
already defined in other RFCs, such as addresses set apart for
documentation, testing, etc.
Enterprise and large scale networks have some specific criteria
around building and validating prior to deployment. The issues with
ULA for infrastructure modeling and labbing at the host level are
more impactful in large enterprises. This is due to the increased
focus on large scale hosts, servers and apps testing. Also, it is
likely that both GUA and ULA may co-exist (or are planned) and
reconfiguring lab hosts and networks isn't practical or desirable due
to inconsistent results for host preference due to [RFC6724]
behavior.
Most large enterprises strive to build lab, dev, and qa environments
that reflect production as accurately as possible. This is a fairly
straightforward way to avoid disparity between production and non-
production. Enterprise environments is an area that needs increased
IPv6 adoption. In an effort to make it easier to model a global
enterprise and to avoid the pitfalls of ULA de-preferenced host
Horley, et al. Expires January 28, 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Expanding the IPv6 Lab Use Space July 2021
behavior or squatting on other IPv6 space, a specific IPv6 lab prefix
is being assigned.
Because this address prefix has previously been used for the OSI
NSAP-mapped prefix set in [RFC4048] and [RFC4548], and deprecated,
this address prefix is already limited in its usability. In
addition, the address prefix was returned to IANA and is available to
be marked for lab or other purposes.
This assignment implies that IPv6 network operators SHOULD add this
address prefix to the list of non-routeable IPv6 address space, and
if packet filters are deployed, then this address prefix SHOULD be
added to packet filters. This is not a local-use address prefix so
these filters may be used in both local and public contexts.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA is to record the reservation of the IPv6 global unicast address
prefix 0200::/7 as a lab-only prefix in the IPv6 address registry.
No end party is to be assigned this address.
5. Security Considerations
The addresses assigned for lab and staging use SHOULD be filtered as
noted above.
Setting aside address space for lab and staging use, and adding this
address space to common filters to prevent destinations in this space
from being routed in production networks (including the global
Internet) improves security by preventing the leakage of prefixes
used for testing into production environments. As such, setting
aside this space improves the overall security posture of the
Internet.
6. Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the work of Bob Hinden and Stephen Deering,
in authoring the protocol standard and the addressing architecture
for IPv6.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
Horley, et al. Expires January 28, 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Expanding the IPv6 Lab Use Space July 2021
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
7.2. Informative References
[RFC3515] Sparks, R., "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Refer
Method", RFC 3515, DOI 10.17487/RFC3515, April 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3515>.
[RFC4048] Carpenter, B., "RFC 1888 Is Obsolete", RFC 4048,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4048, April 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4048>.
[RFC4193] Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast
Addresses", RFC 4193, DOI 10.17487/RFC4193, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4193>.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4291>.
[RFC4548] Gray, E., Rutemiller, J., and G. Swallow, "Internet Code
Point (ICP) Assignments for NSAP Addresses", RFC 4548,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4548, May 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4548>.
[RFC5180] Popoviciu, C., Hamza, A., Van de Velde, G., and D.
Dugatkin, "IPv6 Benchmarking Methodology for Network
Interconnect Devices", RFC 5180, DOI 10.17487/RFC5180, May
2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5180>.
[RFC6724] Thaler, D., Ed., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown,
"Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6
(IPv6)", RFC 6724, DOI 10.17487/RFC6724, September 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6724>.
[RFC6890] Cotton, M., Vegoda, L., Bonica, R., Ed., and B. Haberman,
"Special-Purpose IP Address Registries", BCP 153,
RFC 6890, DOI 10.17487/RFC6890, April 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6890>.
Authors' Addresses
Horley, et al. Expires January 28, 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Expanding the IPv6 Lab Use Space July 2021
Ed Horley
HexaBuild
Email: ed@hexabuild.io
Tom Coffeen
HexaBuild
Email: tom@hexabuild.io
Scott Hogg
HexaBuild
Email: scott@hexabuild.io
Nick Buraglio
Energy Sciences Network
Email: buraglio@es.net
Chris Cummings
Energy Sciences Network
Email: chriscummings@es.net
Kevin Myers
IP ArchiTechs
Email: kevin.myers@iparchitechs.com
Russ White
Juniper Networks
Email: russ@riw.us
Horley, et al. Expires January 28, 2022 [Page 6]