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

Versions: (draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option) 00 01 02 RFC 5075

Network Working Group                                   B. Haberman, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                   JHU APL
Intended status: Standards Track                               R. Hinden
Expires: March 16, 2008                                            Nokia
                                                      September 13, 2007


                 IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option
                   draft-ietf-ipv6-ra-flags-option-02

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 March 16, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

   The IPv6 Neighbor Discovery's Router Advertisement message contains
   an 8-bit field reserved for single-bit flags.  Several protocols have
   reserved flags in this field and others are preparing to reserve a
   sufficient number of flags to exhaust the field.  This document
   defines an option to the Router Advertisement message that expands
   the available number of flag bits available.




Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft            IPv6 RA Flags Options           September 2007


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  Current Router Advertisement Flags  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   4.  Flags Expansion Option  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements  . . . . . . . . . . 8






































Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft            IPv6 RA Flags Options           September 2007


1.  Introduction

   The IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Protocol's [1] Router Advertisement
   message contains an 8-bit field reserved for single-bit flags.
   Several protocols have reserved flags in this field and others are
   preparing to reserve a sufficient number of flags to exhaust the
   field.

   This document defines an option for the Router Advertisement message
   that expands the available number of flag bits by adding an
   additional 48 flag bits to NDP messages.


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 [2].


3.  Current Router Advertisement Flags

   Currently, the NDP Router Advertisement message contains the
   following one-bit flags defined in published RFCs:

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |M|O|H|Prf|P|R|R|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                   Figure 1: Router Advertisement Flags

   o  M - Managed Address Configuration Flag [1]

   o  O - Other Configuration Flag [1]

   o  H - Mobile IPv6 Home Agent Flag [4]

   o  Prf - Router Selection Preferences [5]

   o  P - Neighbor Discovery Proxy Flag [6]

   o  R - Reserved

   With other protocols in the works (e.g., Detecting Network
   Attachment) that are wanting to use flags in the NDP messages, it is
   necessary to define an expansion capability to support new features.




Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft            IPv6 RA Flags Options           September 2007


4.  Flags Expansion Option

   The Neighbor Discovery specification [1] contains the capability to
   define NDP options.  The following (Figure 2) is the definition of
   the Expanded Flags Option (EFO) for NDP Router Advertisement
   messages.

    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     |         Bit fields available ..
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ... for assignment                                              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Figure 2: Router Advertisement Expanded Flags Option

   o  Type - TBD (to be assigned by IANA)

   o  Length - The length MUST be checked when processing the option in
      order to allow for future expansion of this option.  An
      implementation of this specification MUST set the Length to 1,
      MUST ignore any unrecognized data, and MUST be able to recognize
      the specific length in order to skip over unrecognized bits.

   o  Bits - allocated by IANA

   The definition and usage of these bits is to be found in the document
   requesting their allocation.

   During the construction/transmission, this option:

   o  MUST only occur in Router Advertisement messages

   o  MUST occur prior to any additional options associated with any
      flags set in this option

   o  MUST only occur once in the Router Advertisement message

   o  MUST NOT be added to a Router Advertisement message if no flags in
      the option are set

   o  MUST set all unused flags to zero.

   Upon reception, a receiver processing NDP messages containing this
   option:





Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft            IPv6 RA Flags Options           September 2007


   o  MUST ignore the option if it occurs in a message other than a
      Router Advertisement

   o  MUST ignore all instances of the option except the first one
      encountered in the Router Advertisement message

   o  MUST ignore the option if the Length is less than 1

   o  MUST ignore any unknown flag bits.

   The bit fields within the option are numbered from left to right from
   8 to 55 (starting as bit offset 16 in the option) and follow the
   numbering of the flag bits in the RA option described in Figure 1.
   Flag bits 0 to 7 are found in the Router Advertisement message header
   defined in [1]


5.  IANA Considerations

   The IANA is requested to define a new IPv6 Neighbor Discovery option
   for the option defined in this document of the form:

             +------+---------------------------+-----------+
             | Type | Description               | Reference |
             +------+---------------------------+-----------+
             | TBA  | RA Flags Extension Option | [RFCXXXX] |
             +------+---------------------------+-----------+

   The registry for these options can be found at:
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters

   The IANA is requested to create a new registry for IPv6 ND Router
   Advertisement flags.  This should include the current flags in the RA
   option and in the extension option defined in this document.  It is
   suggested the new registry be added to the icmpv6-parameters as shown
   above.  The format for the registry is:

   +---------------+---------------------------------------+-----------+
   | RA Option Bit | Description                           | Reference |
   +---------------+---------------------------------------+-----------+
   | 0             | M - Managed Address Configuration     | [1]       |
   |               | Flag                                  |           |
   | 1             | O - Other Configuration Flag          | [1]       |
   | 2             | H - Mobile IPv6 Home Agent Flag       | [4]       |
   | 3             | Prf - Router Selection Preferences    | [5]       |
   | 4             | Prf - Router Selection Preferences    | [5]       |
   | 5             | P - Neighbor Discovery Proxy Flag     | [6]       |




Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft            IPv6 RA Flags Options           September 2007


   | 6-53          | R - Reserved; Available for           |           |
   |               | assignment                            |           |
   | 54-55         | Private Experimentation               |           |
   +---------------+---------------------------------------+-----------+

   The assignment of new RA flags in the RA option header and for the
   bits defined in the RA extension option defined in this document
   require standards action or IESG approval[3].


6.  Security Considerations

   This protocol shares the security issues of NDP that are documented
   in the "Security Considerations" section of [1].

   The inclusion of additional optional bit fields provides a potential
   covert channel useful for passing information.


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [1]  Narten, T., Nordmark, E., and W. Simpson, "Neighbor Discovery
        for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, December 1998.

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

   [3]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
        Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998.

7.2.  Informative References

   [4]  Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in
        IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.

   [5]  Draves, R. and D. Thaler, "Default Router Preferences and More-
        Specific Routes", RFC 4191, November 2005.

   [6]  Thaler, D., Talwar, M., and C. Patel, "Neighbor Discovery
        Proxies (ND Proxy)", RFC 4389, April 2006.









Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft            IPv6 RA Flags Options           September 2007


Authors' Addresses

   Brian Haberman (editor)
   Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab
   11100 Johns Hopkins Road
   Laurel, MD  20723-6099
   USA

   Phone: +1 443 778 1319
   Email: brian@innovationslab.net


   Robert Hinden
   Nokia
   313 Fairchild Drive
   Mountain View, CA  94043
   USA

   Phone: +1 650 625 2004
   Email: bob.hinden@nokia.com































Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft            IPv6 RA Flags Options           September 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
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).





Haberman & Hinden        Expires March 16, 2008                 [Page 8]


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