DHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT Router (DANIR)
draft-shytyi-v6ops-danir-00
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 | Dmytro Shytyi , Alexandre Petrescu | ||
| Last updated | 2017-10-30 | ||
| 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-shytyi-v6ops-danir-00
Network Working Group D. Shytyi
Internet-Draft A. Petrescu
Intended status: Informational CEA, LIST
Expires: May 3, 2018 October 30, 2017
DHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT Router (DANIR)
draft-shytyi-v6ops-danir-00.txt
Abstract
This document provides a description of the implementation of Dynamic
Host Configuration Protocol version 6 Prefix Delegation, Neighbour
Discovery Protocol and of the use of the Packet Data Protocol in an
Internet of Things Router. This Internet of Things Router is
connected on a cellular network; it is a DHCPv6-PD Client and it
requests a /56 pool of prefixes from the server; the DHCPv6-PD server
is placed in the PGW and is a part of the cellular infrastructure.
After the pool of prefixes is delegated, the Internet of Things
Router derives sub-prefixes from the prefix pool; each one of these
sub-prefixes is aimed at one ingress interface.
After the Internet of Things Router finishes the network prefix
assignment procedure, it advertises the network prefixes on the
ingress links by using the Neighbour Discovery protocol. Finally,
when Hosts receive the sub-prefixes via Router Adverticement
messages, they configure the Global Unique Address with the Stateless
Address Auto-configuration protocol.
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 May 3, 2018.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Solicitation of the network prefix pool . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.1. The Packet Data Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.2. The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 6
with Prefix Delegation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.3. Option: PPP use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2. Assignment of the network prefixes on the links . . . . . 11
4.3. Advertisement of the network prefixes . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction
This document describes the implementation of the Dynamic Host
Configuration Protocol vestion 6 with Prefix Delegation (DHCPv6_PD),
Neighbour Discovery Protocol (NDP) and usage of the Packet Data
Protocol (PDP) in an Internet of Things (IoT) Router.
The use of DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation in LTE networks is overviewed in
[RFC6653]. It misses several important aspects.
The router is a node that forwards IP version 6 packets not
explicitly addressed to itself [RFC8200]. Thus, it has more than one
link to perform the forwarding. With multiple links, the need of
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
multiple global unique network prefixes (GUNPs) , assigned to those
links, appears. To assign the GUNPs to the links, the Requesting IoT
Router Solicits the pool of GUNPs.
First, the Requesting IoT Router solicits the pool of the GUNP from
the Delegating Router.
After the pool is received, the Requesting IoT Router (1) derives
GUNPs and (2) performs address autoconfiguration. During the
autoconfiguration process the Requesting IoT Router assigns the GUNPs
to the links. When the IoT Router finishes the GUNPs assignment
procedure, it starts to advertise the GUNPs on the links with NDP
[RFC4861]. Meanwhile, the Hosts that are connected to the Requesting
IoT Router run the SLAAC mechanism to perform the GUA IP version 6
autoconfiguration.
2. Terminology
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Router - is a node, that performs forwarding. Router node is not a
final destination of forwarded packets.
Delegating Router - is a node, DHCPv6 server, that chooses prefix(es)
for delegation and advertises them to the Requesting Router
[RFC3633].
Requesting IoT Router - is a node that behaves as DHCPv6 client. It
requests the network prefix(es) and assigns network prefix(es) to the
interfaces [RFC6653].
Host - is a node that is not a router.
Link - is an entity that enables link layer communication of nodes.
Interface - node connection to the link.
Link-local address - is an address with usage that is limited by a
link.
Global Unique Address (GUA) - is an address that is globally
available and globally unique.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
3. Overview
This section provides an overview of the actions performed on the
Delegating Router, Requesting IoT Router and host to perform address
assignment on the interfaces with different GUNP. The process of IP
version 6 address assignment starts with advertising of the GUNP pool
from the Delegating Router to the Requesting IoT Router. To perform
such a solicitation, the Requesting IoT Router runs the DHCPv6_PD.
+-----------------+
| |
| Delegating |
| router |
| |
| (DHCPv6 server) |
+-----------------+
|
|DHCPv6_PD network prefix
POOL |2001:DB8:XYZU:TVWZ::/56
|
| GUA Prefix_0 /64
|interface_0
+-------------------------------+
| |
| Requesting |
| IoT router |
| |
|(DHCPv6_PDclient + RADVDserver)|
+-------------------------------+
|interface_1 |interface_2 |interface_3
| | |
GUNP |Prefix_1 /64 |Prefix_2 /64 |Prefix_3 /64
|SLAAC GUA |SLAAC GUA |SLAAC GUA
+-------------+ +------------+ +-------------+
| | | | | |
| Host 1 | | Host 2 | | Host 3 |
| | | | | |
+-------------+ +------------+ +-------------+
(In the above figure the scenario with 3 hosts connected to the
Requesting IoT router is presented. Normally there are no number
limitations of connected hosts.)
When the DHCPv6 message exchange is performed, the Requesting IoT
Router receives the pool of IPv6 GUNPs. After the pool of GUNPs is
received, the Requesting IoT Router performs the autoconfiguration.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
Precisely, when the Requesting IoT Router's interface is attached on
the link, the Requesting IoT Router assigns to this link the GUNP
taken from GUNP pool. The Requesting IoT Router performs the GUNP
assignment procedure for multiple links over the interfaces.
Finally, this mechanism offers the automated assignment of GUNPs to
the links. At the moment of autoconfiguration, the Requesting IoT
Router's interfaces are already assigned with link local addresses.
The next step of the autoconfiguration phase is performed using the
Neighbor Discovery protocol. The latter advertises the network's
configuration on the links with different interfaces thus with
different GUNPs. To perform the GUNPs advertisement, the Requesting
IoT ROuter sends the "Router Advertisement Messages" via its
interfaces. The Router Avertisement Messages carry the GUNPs that
are further used by the stateless autoconfiguration mechanism
(SLAAC). There exists an open source implementation of Neighbor
Discovery protocol - RADVD sever. With RADVD it is possible to
configure hosts interfaces connected to the router's interfaces in
automatic manner. It is possible thanks to the fact that hosts run
the SLAAC.
The IP version 6 stateless autoconfiguration mechanism enables hosts
to perform the address autoconfiguration. The SLAAC mechanism is
used when it is enough to have random unique IP version 6 addresses
[RFC4862]. The length of the IP version 6 address is 16 bytes. The
first part of the address (8 bytes) consists of the GUNP information
associated with a link. The network prefix is advertised by the IoT
Router on the link. The second part of the address (8 bytes)
consists of interface identifier on the link. The interface
identifier is generated locally and randomly.
+---------------------------------------+------------------------+
| 128 - N bits | N bits |
+---------------------------------------+------------------------+
| link prefix | interface identifier |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
(In the above figure, an IP version 6 address scheme is presented
[RFC4862].)
3.1. Environment
This section describes the location of the Delegating Router and the
Requesting IoT Router in the cellular provider's infrastructure
model. The model is not a real cellular provider infrastructure.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
After the DHCPv6 packet leaves the cellular interface of the IoT
Requesting Router via wireless OFDMA link, it reaches the element of
the access network which connects to the user equipment (UEs) -
eNodeB station.
Further, the packet is transmitted to the Serving Gateway (SGW), as
all the user's IP packets. SGW is used to enable the UE movement
between eNodeBs. When the UE moves between eNodeBs, the SGW keeps
information about the bearers.
The final destination of the DHCPv6 packet is the Packet Data Network
Gateway, that is responsible for IP address allocation for the UE and
for filtering of down-link user's IP packets into the different QoS-
based bearers.
The model of the infrastructure described in this this section is a
simplified example. Real infrastructure construction could contain
multiple SGW and eNodeBs and network equipment (that is not described
in the current example) with respect of existing standards.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
+---------------+ |
| PGW | |
| Delegating | |
| Router | |
+---------------+ |
| |
| |
+---------------+ |
| SGW | | Cellular infrastructure
+---------------+ |
| |
| |
+---------------+ |
| eNodeB | |
+---------------+ |
| |
| |
~ ~ Wireless OFDMA 3G/4G
| |
+---------------+ |
| +-------+ | |
| | Modem | | |
| +-------+ | |
| | | |
| +-------+ | |
| | ARM | | |
| +-------+ | |
| Requesting | | User Equipment
| IoT | |
| Router | |
+---------------+ |
(The above figure descibes the model of the path followed by a DHCPv6
packet from IoT requesting router to the Delegating PGW router. The
model is not a real infrastructure.)
4. Specification
This section presents the process that starts with delegation of
Network Prefix pool 2001:DB8:XXXX:XX::/56 from the Delegation Router
and finishes with the configuration of IPv6 prefixes on the hosts
interfaces. Each Requesting IoT router's interface acts on a unique
link. The Host's interfaces, connected to the Requesting IoT router,
acts on the same unique links as the Requesting IoT router's
interfaces.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
4.1. Solicitation of the network prefix pool
4.1.1. The Packet Data Protocol
This section describes how the Requesting IoT Router obtains the GUA
address on the Recipient Interface (RI) (OFDMA interface, 3GPP
interface). The message "Activate PDP context Accept" is useful for
forming the Globally Unique Address on the RI. Further details will
be described.
ARM Modem eNodeB SGW PGW
| | | | |
| | PDP | |PDP |
| |--------->| |--->|
| | | | |
| |<---------| |<---|
| | | | |
| | | | |
4.1.2. The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 6 with Prefix
Delegation
To perform the pool solicitation, the Prefix Delegation options of
the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 6 (DHCPv6) are used
[I-D.ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis].
The Requesting IoT Router sends the DHCPv6 "Solicit" packet to the
Delegating Router via the wireless link. The DHCPv6 "Solicit" packet
consists of Client Identifier, Transaction ID, Elapsed time and
Identity Association for Prefix Delegation (IA_PD) options. The
initial "Solicit" packet triggers the 4 message exchange, that
finishes with the reception of the GUNPs pool by the Requesting IoT
Router.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
+------------+ +----------+
| Requesting | | PGW |
| IoT | |Delegating|
| Router | | Router |
+------------+ +----------+
| |
| |
|1 Solicit |
|--------------> |
| |
| 2 Advertise |
| <---------------|
| |
|3 Request |
|--------------> |
| |
| |
| 4 Reply |
| <---------------|
| |
| |
| |
(In the above figure the full DHCPv6 message exchange mechanism
between the ARM part of UE and PGW is presented.)
The IA_PD option consists of the Identity Association (IA) - group
identifier [RFC3633], parameters (IA id, times to extend the
lifetimes of prefixes and prefixes allocated to the IA). The full
description of the IA_PD option is presented in the RFC3633
[RFC3633].
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OPTION_IA_PD | option-length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IAID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| T1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| T2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
. .
. IA_PD-options .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
(in the above figure the DHCPv6 IA_PD option format [RFC3633].)
The IA_PD-options field carries the IA_PD Prefix Option. The IA_PD
Prefix Option carries the recommended preferred/valid life time and
IPv6 prefix with prefix length. The additional fields allocated for
the options for the advertised GUNP [RFC3633].
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OPTION_IAPREFIX | option-length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| preferred-lifetime |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| valid-lifetime |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| prefix-length | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ IPv6 prefix |
| (16 octets) |
| |
| |
| |
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ .
. IAprefix-options .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
(in the above figure the DHCPv6 IA_PD Prefix option format is
presented [RFC3633].
The PGW (Delegating Router) advertises, through the usage of a DHCPv6
packet, an IPv6 pool 2001:DB8::/56 to the Requesting IoT Router. The
packet is sent from the cellular infrastructure to the Requesting IoT
Router, via the wireless link. The full message exchange consists
of: Solicit, Advertise, Request and Reply messages.
The "Request", "Reply" messages are used to add/remove/update the
assigned prefixes to IA_PDs.
The Hop Limit of packets that contain the DHCPv6 data should be 255
to satisfy the properties of the cellular infrastructure. To reach
the PGW from the UE the DHCPv6 packets are encapsulated by SGW into
UDP/IPv4 packets; this encapsulation is for the GTP-U tunnel. The
corresponding decapsulation mechanism decreases the Hop Limit; when
the Hop Limit reaches value 0 the packet is discarded; to avoid this
situation it is required to put the Hop Limit value of the DHCPv6
Solicit equal to 255.
4.1.3. Option: PPP use
It is possible to use IPv6-over-PPP protocol, with LCP, between the
ARM and the modem. This protocol helps with forming an IPv6 link-
local address on the IoT Router's RI.
ARM Modem eNodeB SGW PGW
| | | | |
|------->| | | |
|PPP LCP | | | |
|<-------| | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
4.2. Assignment of the network prefixes on the links
The receipt of the IA_PD Prefix option triggers the GUA
autoconfiguration on the Requesting IoT Router's interfaces. The
Recipient Interface (RI) receives a message with the IA_PD prefix
option and does not perform the autoconfiguration on the current
stage.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
All interfaces, except RI, now follow the GUA autoconfiguration
procedure. The number of interfaces that should follow the procedure
could be specified in the configuration file of the Requesting IoT
Router.
The GUA interface autoconfiguration procedure in the Requesting IoT
Router is done by assigning the network addresses from different
GUNPs to the links. The assignment of network addresses is performed
using the 2001:DB8:XXXX:XX::/56 network pool. Therefore, the
Requesting IoT Router operates on multiple links (ingress links).
The IoT Router derives several GUNPs from the received pool. For
example, from the pool 2001:db8:XYZU:TVWZ::/56 the GUNPs
2001:db8:XYZU:TV01::/64 and 2001:db8:XYZU:TV02::/64 are derived.
Further, the GUNPs are aimed at links. For example, the GUNP
2001:DB8:XXXX:XX01::/64 is aimed at the interface 1, and
2001:DB8:XXXX:XX02::/64 at the interface 2; further,
2001:DB8:XXXX:XXff::/64 corresponds to the interface interface 256.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
++=======================++
II II
II II
II II
II II |H
II Prefix 1 +-----+ Link 1 |o
II +-------+ | I1 |............................|s
II | /64 | +-----+ | |t
II | | II |2001:DB8:XXXX:XX01::/64 |
II | +--------------+ |1
II | II
II | II
II | II
II | II |H
/56 +-----+ |Prefix 2 +-----+ Link 2 |o
......| I0 |----+-------+ | I2 |............................|s
+-----+ | /64 | +-----+ | |t
II | | II |2001:DB8:XXXX:XX02::/64 |
II | +--------------+ |2
II | II
II | II
II | II
II | II |H
II |Prefix 3 +-----+ Link 3 |o
II +-------+ | I3 |............................|s
II /64 | +-----+ | |t
II | II |2001:DB8:XXXX:XX03::/64 |
II +--------------+ |3
II II
II II
++=======================++
Requesting IoT Router
(In the above figure the Requesting IoT Router, with 4 links, is
presented).
There are 2 cases that could be considered. The first one is: all
interfaces (except the RI) of the Requesting IoT Router could be
assigned with the corresponding GUNPs. In the second case, a list of
manually selected interfaces is obtained. Finally interfaces in the
list are assigned with GUNPs. The interfaces numbers represent their
position in alphabetically ordered list by the names that operating
system assigned to them during the initialization.
During the final step of the GUA autoconfiguration in the Requesting
IoT Router, the assignment of the IPv6 network addresses to the
interfaces is performed. The IPv6 network addresses have the current
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
format: 2001:DB8::XXXX:XXYY:1/56, where YY - is a value that
represents the number of the interface. When the GUA
autoconfiguration on the Requesting IoT Router is finished, the
Requesting IoT Router advertises via its interfaces the GUNPs to the
Hosts.
4.3. Advertisement of the network prefixes
Finally, the Requesting IoT Router runs the Neighbour Discovery
Protocol. The Neighbour Discovery Protocol messages allow to
advertise the configuration to the hosts. To send the configuration
parameters from the Requesting IoT Router to the hosts, the "Router
Advertisement" type messages are used [RFC4861]. Usually the "Router
Advertisement" messages are triggered by the "Router Solicit"
messages sent from the Hosts to the Requesting IoT Router [RFC4861].
The "Router Advertisement" message includes the "Prefix Information"
option. It is located in the "Options part" of the "Router
Advertisement" message. The position of the "Prefix Information"
option is presented in the figure below.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Cur Hop Limit |M|O| Reserved | Router Lifetime |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reachable Time |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Retrans Timer |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Options ... PREFIX INFORMATION
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
(Figure above presents the Router Advertisement message format
[RFC4861])
The "Prefix Information" option carries the GUNP value and length.
These configuration parameters provide on-link GUNPs, used for SLAAC
auto configuration. The Prefix Length is a number that describes the
number of bits which are used to identify the GUNP. And each GUNP
represents the sub-network.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | Prefix Length |L|A| Reserved1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Valid Lifetime |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Preferred Lifetime |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ +
| |
+ Prefix +
| |
+ +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
5. Security Considerations
At this time, no security considerations are addressed by this memo.
6. IANA Considerations
No request to IANA at this time.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank (in alphabetical order) Michael
Mathias Boc, Giorgio Campo, David Frey and Artiol Kalca for their
valuable comments related to the Linux Network stack, the Legato OS
recipies and the cross-compilation for the ARM architecture. Also
the authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of Michele
Russo for valuable comments during the review of this memo.
8. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis]
Mrugalski, T., Siodelski, M., Volz, B., Yourtchenko, A.,
Richardson, M., Jiang, S., Lemon, T., and T. Winters,
"Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)
bis", draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-10 (work in progress),
September 2017.
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
[RFC1661] Simpson, W., Ed., "The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)",
STD 51, RFC 1661, DOI 10.17487/RFC1661, July 1994,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1661>.
[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>.
[RFC3633] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic
Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3633, December 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3633>.
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4861>.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4862, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4862>.
[RFC6459] Korhonen, J., Ed., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen,
T., Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation
Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)",
RFC 6459, DOI 10.17487/RFC6459, January 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6459>.
[RFC6653] Sarikaya, B., Xia, F., and T. Lemon, "DHCPv6 Prefix
Delegation in Long-Term Evolution (LTE) Networks",
RFC 6653, DOI 10.17487/RFC6653, July 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6653>.
[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>.
Authors' Addresses
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 16]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6_PD, PDP and NDP Implementation in IoT R October 2017
Dmytro Shytyi
CEA, LIST
CEA Saclay
Gif-sur-Yvette , Ile-de-France 91190
France
Email: ietf.dmytro@shytyi.net
Alexandre Petrescu
CEA, LIST
CEA Saclay
Gif-sur-Yvette , Ile-de-France 91190
France
Phone: +33169089223
Email: Alexandre.Petrescu@cea.fr
Shytyi & Petrescu Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 17]