[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 RFC 6564

6man Working Group                                           S. Krishnan
Internet-Draft                                                  Ericsson
Intended status: Standards Track                           j h. woodyatt
Expires: September 15, 2011                                        Apple
                                                                E. Kline
                                                                  Google
                                                             J. Hoagland
                                                                Symantec
                                                               M. Bhatia
                                                          Alcatel-Lucent
                                                          March 14, 2011


              An uniform format for IPv6 extension headers
                       draft-ietf-6man-exthdr-02

Abstract

   In IPv6, optional internet-layer information is encoded in separate
   headers that may be placed between the IPv6 header and the transport
   layer header.  There are a small number of such extension headers
   currently defined.  This document defines a format for defining new
   IPv6 extension headers.

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 http://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 September 15, 2011.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 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



Krishnan, et al.       Expires September 15, 2011               [Page 1]

Internet-Draft      Format for IPv6 extension headers         March 2011


   (http://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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   4.  Proposed IPv6 Extension Header format . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   5.  Backward Compatibility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   6.  Future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   9.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   10. Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5





























Krishnan, et al.       Expires September 15, 2011               [Page 2]

Internet-Draft      Format for IPv6 extension headers         March 2011


1.  Introduction

   The base IPv6 standard [RFC2460] defines extension headers as an
   expansion mechanism to carry optional internet layer information.
   Extension headers, with the exception of the hop-by-hop options
   header, are not usually processed on intermediate nodes.  However,
   some intermediate nodes such as firewalls, may need to look at the
   transport layer header fields in order to make a decision to allow or
   deny the packet.  If new extension headers are defined and the
   intermediate node is not aware of them, the intermediate node cannot
   proceed further in the header chain since it does not know where the
   unknown header ends and the next header begins.  The main issue is
   that the extension header format is not standardized and hence it is
   not possible to skip past the unknown header.  This document intends
   to define a standard format for IPv6 extension headers.


2.  Conventions used in this document

   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].


3.  Applicability

   The base IPv6 standard [RFC2460] allows the use of both extension
   headers and destination options in order to encode optional
   destination information in an IPv6 packet.  The use of destination
   options to encode this information, provides more flexible handling
   characteristics and better backward compatibility than using
   extension headers.  Because of this, implementations SHOULD use
   destination options as the preferred mechanism for encoding optional
   destination information, and use a new extension header only if
   destination options do not satisfy their needs.  The request for
   creation of a new IPv6 extension header MUST be accompanied by an
   specific explanation of why destination options could not be used to
   convey this information.













Krishnan, et al.       Expires September 15, 2011               [Page 3]

Internet-Draft      Format for IPv6 extension headers         March 2011


4.  Proposed IPv6 Extension Header format

   This document proposes that all IPv6 extension headers be encoded in
   a consistent TLV format so that it is possible for nodes to skip over
   unknown extension headers and continue to further process the header
   chain.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Next Header  |  Hdr Ext Len  |                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
   |                                                               |
   .                                                               .
   .                  Header Specific Data                         .
   .                                                               .
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Next Header          8-bit selector.  Identifies the type of header
                        immediately following the Extension header.
                        Uses the same values as the IPv4 Protocol
                        field.
   Hdr Ext Len          8-bit unsigned integer.  Length of the
                        Extension header in 8-octet units, not
                        including the first 8 octets.
   Header Specific      Variable length. Fields specific to the
   Data                 extension header

                     Figure 1: Extension header layout


5.  Backward Compatibility

   The scheme proposed in this document is not intended to be backward
   compatible with all the currently defined IPv6 extension headers.  It
   applies only to newly defined extension headers.  Specifically, the
   fragment header predates this document and does not follow the format
   proposed in this document.


6.  Future work

   This document proposes one step in easing the inspection of extension
   headers by middleboxes.  There is further work required in this area.
   Some issues that are left unresolved beyond this document include





Krishnan, et al.       Expires September 15, 2011               [Page 4]

Internet-Draft      Format for IPv6 extension headers         March 2011


   o  There can be an arbitrary number of extension headers.
   o  Extension headers must be processed in the order they appear.
   o  Extension headers may alter the processing of the payload itself,
      and hence the packet may not be processed properly without
      knowledge of said header.


7.  IANA Considerations

   This document does not require any IANA actions.


8.  Security Considerations

   This document proposes a standard format for the IPv6 extension
   headers so that intermediate nodes that do not understand the
   contents of these headers can look past them.  Intermediate nodes,
   such as firewalls, skipping over unknown headers might end up
   allowing the setup of a covert channel from the outside of the
   firewall to the inside using the data field(s) of the unknown
   extension headers.


9.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Albert Manfredi, Bob Hinden, Brian
   Carpenter, Erik Nordmark, Hemant Singh, Lars Westberg, Markku Savela,
   Tatuya Jinmei, Thomas Narten, Vishwas Manral, Alfred Hoenes, Joel
   Halpern and Ran Atkinson for their reviews and suggestions that made
   this document better.


10.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2460]  Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
              (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.












Krishnan, et al.       Expires September 15, 2011               [Page 5]

Internet-Draft      Format for IPv6 extension headers         March 2011


Authors' Addresses

   Suresh Krishnan
   Ericsson
   8400 Decarie Blvd.
   Town of Mount Royal, QC
   Canada

   Phone: +1 514 345 7900 x42871
   Email: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com


   james woodyatt
   Apple Inc.
   1 Infinite Loop
   Cupertino, CA  95014
   US

   Email: jhw@apple.com


   Erik Kline
   Google
   604 Arizona Avenue
   Santa Monica, CA  90401
   US

   Phone: +1 310 460 4080
   Email: ek@google.com


   James Hoagland
   Symantec Corporation
   350 Ellis St.
   Mountain View, CA  94043
   US

   Email: Jim_Hoagland@symantec.com
   URI:   http://symantec.com/


   Manav Bhatia
   Alcatel-Lucent
   Bangalore
   India

   Email: manav.bhatia@alcatel-lucent.com




Krishnan, et al.       Expires September 15, 2011               [Page 6]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/