IANA Considerations for the IPv4 and IPv6 Router Alert Options
draft-manner-router-alert-iana-03
The information below is for an old version of the document that is already published as an RFC.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 5350.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Andrew McDonald , Jukka Manner | ||
| Last updated | 2023-11-29 (Latest revision 2008-05-29) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | WG state | (None) | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 5350 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Jari Arkko | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-manner-router-alert-iana-03
Network Working Group J. Manner
Internet-Draft TKK
Updates: RFC2113, RFC3175 A. McDonald
(if approved) Siemens/Roke
Intended status: Standards Track May 29, 2008
Expires: November 30, 2008
IANA Considerations for the IPv4 and IPv6 Router Alert Option
draft-manner-router-alert-iana-03
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 November 30, 2008.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
Abstract
This document updates the IANA allocation rules and registry of IPv4
and IPv6 Router Alert Option Values.
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Use of the Router Alert Option Value Field . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. IANA Considerations for IPv4 Router Alert Option Values . . 5
3.2. IANA Considerations for IPv6 Router Alert Option Values . . 5
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 9
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
1. Introduction
The IP Router Alert Option is defined for IPv4 in [RFC2113]. A
similar IPv6 option is defined in [RFC2711]. When one of these
options is present in an IP datagram, it indicates that the contents
of the datagram may be interesting to routers. The Router Alert
Option (RAO) is used by protocols such as RSVP [RFC2205] and IGMP
[RFC3376].
Both the IPv4 and IPv6 option contain a two octet value field to
carry extra information. This information can be used, for example,
by routers to determine whether or not the packet should be more
closely examined by them.
There can be up to 65536 values for the RAO. Yet, currently there is
only a registry for IPv6 values. No registry or allocation policies
are defined for IPv4.
This document proposes updates to the IANA registry for managing IPv4
and IPv6 Router Alert Option Values, and proposes to remove one
existing IPv6 Router Alert Option value.
2. Use of the Router Alert Option Value Field
One difference between the specifications for the IPv4 and IPv6
Router Alert Options is the way values for the value field are
managed. In [RFC2113], the IPv4 Router Alert Option value field has
the value 0 assigned to "Router shall examine packet". All other
values (1-65535) are reserved. Neither a management mechanism (e.g.,
such as an IANA registry) nor an allocation policy are provided for
the IPv4 RAO values.
The IPv6 Router Alert Option has an IANA managed registry
[IANA-IPv6RAO] containing allocations for the value field.
In [RFC3175] the IPv4 Router Alert Option Value is described as a
parameter that provides "additional information" to the router in
making its interception decision, rather than as a registry managed
by IANA. As such, this aggregation mechanism makes use of the value
field to carry the reservation aggregation level. For the IPv6
option, this document requests a set of 32 values to be assigned by
IANA for indicating reservation levels. However, since other
registrations had already been made in that registry these values are
from 3-35 (that is actually a set of 33 values).
Although it might have been desirable to have the same values being
used in both the IPv4 and IPv6 registries, the initial allocations in
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
[RFC2711] and the aggregation level allocations in [RFC3175] have
made this impossible. The following table shows the allocations in
the IPv6 registry and values used in the IPv4 registry, where the
latter have been deduced from [RFC2113] and [RFC3175] with the
assumption that the number of aggregation levels can be limited to 32
as in the IPv6 case. Entries for values 6 to 31 have been elided for
brevity.
+----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+
| Value | IPv4 RAO Meaning | IPv6 RAO Meaning |
+----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+
| 0 | Router shall examine | Datagram contains a |
| | packet [RFC2113] | Multicast Listener Discovery |
| | [RFC2205] [RFC3376] | message [RFC2711] [RFC2710] |
| | [RFC4286] | [RFC4286] |
| 1 | Aggregated Reservation | Datagram contains RSVP |
| | Nesting Level 1 | message [RFC2711] [RFC2205] |
| | [RFC3175] | |
| 2 | Aggregated Reservation | Datagram contains an Active |
| | Nesting Level 2 | Networks message [RFC2711] |
| | [RFC3175] | [Schwartz2000] |
| 3 | Aggregated Reservation | Aggregated Reservation |
| | Nesting Level 3 | Nesting Level 0 [RFC3175] |
| | [RFC3175] | |
| 4 | Aggregated Reservation | Aggregated Reservation |
| | Nesting Level 4 | Nesting Level 1 [RFC3175] |
| | [RFC3175] | |
| 5 | Aggregated Reservation | Aggregated Reservation |
| | Nesting Level 5 | Nesting Level 2 [RFC3175] |
| | [RFC3175] | |
| ... | ... | ... |
| 32 | Aggregated Reservation | Aggregated Reservation |
| | Nesting Level 32 | Nesting Level 29 [RFC3175] |
| | [RFC3175] | |
| 33 | Reserved | Aggregated Reservation |
| | | Nesting Level 30 [RFC3175] |
| 34 | Reserved | Aggregated Reservation |
| | | Nesting Level 31 [RFC3175] |
| 35 | Reserved | Aggregated Reservation |
| | | Nesting Level 32(*) |
| | | [RFC3175] |
| 36-65534 | Reserved | Reserved to IANA for future |
| | | assignment |
| 65535 | Reserved | Reserved [IANA-IPv6RAO] |
+----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+
Note (*): The entry in the above table for the IPv6 RAO Value of 35
(Aggregated Reservation Nesting Level 32) has been marked due to an
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
inconsistency in the text of [RFC3175], and that is consequently
reflected in the IANA registry. In that document the values 3-35
(i.e. 33 values) are defined for nesting levels 0-31 (i.e. 32
levels).
It is unclear why nesting levels begin at 1 for IPv4 (described in
section 1.4.9 of [RFC3175]) and 0 for IPv6 (allocated in section 6 of
[RFC3175]).
3. IANA Considerations
This section contains the proposed new procedures for managing IPv4
Router Alert Option values. This requires the creation of a registry
for IPv4 Router Alert Option Values (described in Section 3.1) and
updates the IPv6 Router Alert Option Values (described in
Section 3.2).
IP Router Alert Option values are currently managed separately for
IPv4 and IPv6. This should not change, as there has been seen little
value in forcing the two registry to be aligned.
3.1. IANA Considerations for IPv4 Router Alert Option Values
The value field, as specified in [RFC2113] is two octets in length.
The value field is registered and maintained by IANA. The initial
contents of this registry are:
+-------------+--------------------------------------+-----------+
| Value | Description | Reference |
+-------------+--------------------------------------+-----------+
| 0 | Router shall examine packet | [RFC2113] |
| 1-32 | Aggregated Reservation Nesting Level | [RFC3175] |
| 33-65502 | Available for assignment by the IANA | |
| 65503-65534 | Available for experimental use | |
| 65535 | Reserved | |
+-------------+--------------------------------------+-----------+
New values are to be assigned via IETF Review as defined in
[RFC5226].
3.2. IANA Considerations for IPv6 Router Alert Option Values
The registry for IPv6 Router Alert Option Values should continue to
be maintained as specified in [RFC2711].
In addition, the following value should be removed from the IANA
registry and reserved for possible future use (not to be allocated
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
currently). The reason is that it is a duplicate value, aggregation
level 0 means end-to-end signaling, and this already has an IPv6 RAO
value "1" assigned.
+-------+--------------------------+-----------+
| Value | Description | Reference |
+-------+--------------------------+-----------+
| 3 | RSVP Aggregation level 0 | [RFC3175] |
+-------+--------------------------+-----------+
The following IPv6 RAO values should be made available for
experimental use:
+-------------+------------------+-----------+
| Value | Description | Reference |
+-------------+------------------+-----------+
| 65503-65534 | Experimental use | |
+-------------+------------------+-----------+
4. Security Considerations
Since this document is only concerned with the IANA management of the
IPv4 and IPv6 Router Alert Option values registry it raises no new
security issues beyond those identified in [RFC2113] and [RFC2711].
Yet, as discussed in RFC 4727 [RFC4727] production networks do not
necessarily support the use of experimental code points in IP option
headers. The network scope of support for experimental values should
carefully be evaluated before deploying any experimental RAO value
across extended network domains, such as the public Internet. The
potential to disrupt the stable operation of the network hosting the
experiment through the use of unsupported experimental code points is
a serious consideration when planning an experiment using such code
points.
When experimental RAO values are deployed within an administratively
self-contained network domain, the network administrators should
ensure that each value is used consistently to avoid interference
between experiments. When experimental values are used in traffic
that crosses multiple administrative domains, the experimenters
should assume that there is a risk that the same values will be used
simultaneously by other experiments and thus that there is a
possibility that the experiments will interfere. Particular
attention should be given to security threats that such interference
might create.
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
5. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Robert Hancock, Martin Stiemerling, Alan Ford and Francois
Le Faucheur for their helpful comments on this document.
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[IANA-IPv6RAO]
"IANA Registry for Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)
Router Alert Option Values" .
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-routeralert-values>
[RFC2113] Katz, D., "IP Router Alert Option", RFC 2113,
February 1997.
[RFC2711] Partridge, C. and A. Jackson, "IPv6 Router Alert Option",
RFC 2711, October 1999.
[RFC3175] Baker, F., Iturralde, C., Le Faucheur, F., and B. Davie,
"Aggregation of RSVP for IPv4 and IPv6 Reservations",
RFC 3175, September 2001.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
6.2. Informative References
[RFC2205] Braden, B., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1
Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997.
[RFC2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W., and B. Haberman, "Multicast
Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710,
October 1999.
[RFC3376] Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A.
Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version
3", RFC 3376, October 2002.
[RFC4286] Haberman, B. and J. Martin, "Multicast Router Discovery",
RFC 4286, December 2005.
[RFC4727] Fenner, B., "Experimental Values In IPv4, IPv6, ICMPv4,
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
ICMPv6, UDP, and TCP Headers", RFC 4727, November 2006.
[Schwartz2000]
Schwartz, B., Jackson, A., Strayer, W., Zhou, W.,
Rockwell, D., and C. Partridge, "Smart Packets: Applying
Active Networks to Network Management", ACM Transactions
on Computer Systems (TOCS) Volume 18 , Issue 1,
February 2000.
Authors' Addresses
Jukka Manner
Helsinki University of Technology (TKK)
P.O. Box 3000
Espoo FIN-02015 TKK
Finland
Phone: +358 9 451 2481
Email: jukka.manner@tkk.fi
Andrew McDonald
Roke Manor Research Ltd (a Siemens company)
Old Salisbury Lane
Romsey, Hampshire SO51 0ZN
United Kingdom
Email: andrew.mcdonald@roke.co.uk
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IANA Considerations for Router Alert May 2008
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
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
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Manner & McDonald Expires November 30, 2008 [Page 9]