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

Versions: (draft-droms-mext-nemo-pd) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 RFC 6276

Mobility Extensions for IPv6                                    R. Droms
(MExt)                                                        P. Thubert
Internet-Draft                                                     Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track                               F. Dupont
Expires: April 29, 2010                                              ISC
                                                               W. Haddad
                                                                Ericsson
                                                        October 26, 2009


                   DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO
                       draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd-03

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and 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 April 29, 2010.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
   publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.





Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


Abstract

   One aspect of network mobility support is the assignment of a prefix
   or prefixes to a Mobile Router (MR) for use on the links in the
   Mobile Network.  DHCPv6 prefix delegation can be used for this
   configuration task.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Application of DHCPv6 prefix delegation to mobile networks
       for delegation of home prefixes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.1.  When the MR uses DHCPv6  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.2.  Use of MR-HA tunnel for DHCPv6 messages  . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.3.  DHCPv6 Relay Agent for transmission of DHCPv6 messages . .  5
       3.3.1.  Relay agent configuration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       3.3.2.  Transmission of DHCPv6 messages  . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       3.3.3.  Receipt of DHCPv6 messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     3.4.  Exchanging DHCPv6 messages when MR is at home  . . . . . .  6
     3.5.  Selecting an HA that provides DHCPv6PD . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.6.  Minimizing DHCPv6PD messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     3.7.  Location of DHCPv6PD Delegating Router function  . . . . .  7
     3.8.  Other DHCPv6 functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   5.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     6.1.  Revision -00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     6.2.  Revision -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     6.3.  Revision -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     7.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
















Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


1.  Introduction

   One aspect of network mobility support is the assignment of a prefix
   or prefixes to a Mobile Router for use on the links in the Mobile
   Network.  DHCPv6 prefix delegation [RFC3633] (DHCPv6PD) can be used
   for this configuration task.


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 RFC2119 [RFC2119].

   The following terms used in this document are defined in the IPv6
   Addressing Architecture document [RFC4291]:

      link-local unicast address

      link-local scope multicast address

   The following terms used in this document are defined in the mobile
   IPv6 specification [RFC3775]:

      home agent (HA)

      home link

   The following terms used in this document are defined in the Mobile
   Network terminology document [RFC4886]:

      Mobile Router (MR)

      Mobile Network

      mobile host (MH)

   The following terms used in this document are defined in the DHCPv6
   [RFC3315] and DHCPv6 prefix delegation [RFC3633] specifications:

      delegating router (DR; acts as a DHCPv6 server)

      requesting router (RR; acts as a DHCPv6 client)

      DHCPv6 relay agent

   The following acronym is used in this document:




Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


   DHCPv6PD:  DHCPv6 prefix delegation


3.  Application of DHCPv6 prefix delegation to mobile networks for
    delegation of home prefixes

   The NEMO Basic protocol [RFC3963] extends the mobile IPv6 protocol
   [RFC3775] to enable network mobility.  In this extension, a MR uses
   the mobile IPv6 protocol to establish and maintain a session with its
   HA, and uses bidirectional tunneling between the MR and HA to provide
   a path through which nodes attached to links in the Mobile Network
   can maintain connectivity with nodes not in the Mobile Network.

   The requirements for NEMO [RFC4885] include the ability of the MR to
   receive delegated prefixes that can then be assigned to links in the
   Mobile Network.  DHCPv6PD can be used to meet this requirement for
   prefix delegation.

   To use DHCPv6PD for Mobile Networks, the HA assumes the role of
   either the DR or a DHCPv6 relay agent and the MR assumes the role of
   the RR.  Throughout the remainder of this document, the HA will be
   assumed to be acting as a DHCPv6PD DR or relay agent and the MR will
   be assumed to be acting as a RR.

   If the HA is acting as relay agent, some other device acts as the DR.
   For example, the server providing DHCPv6 service in the home network
   might also provide NEMO DHCPv6PD service.  Or, a home network with
   several HAs might configure one of those HAs as a DHCPv6PD server
   while the other HAs act as relay agents.

   The HA and MR exchange DHCPv6PD protocol messages through the tunnel
   connecting them.  The tunnel acts as the link labeled "DSL to
   subscriber premises" in figure 1 of the DHCPv6PD specification.

   The DHCPv6PD server is provisioned with prefixes to be assigned using
   any of the prefix assignment mechanisms described in the DHCPv6PD
   specifications.  Other updates to the HA data structures required as
   a side effect of prefix delegation are specified by the particular
   network mobility protocol.  For example, in the case of Basic Network
   Mobility Support [RFC3963], the HA would add an entry in its binding
   cache registering the delegated prefix to the MR to which the prefix
   was delegated.

3.1.  When the MR uses DHCPv6

   The MR initiates a DHCPv6 message exchange for prefix delegation
   whenever it establishes an MR-HA tunnel to its HA.  If the MR does
   not have any active delegated prefixes (with unexpired leases), the



Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


   MR initiates a DHCPv6 message exchange with a DHCPv6 Solicit message
   as described in section 17 of RFC 3315 and section 12.1 of RFC 3633.
   If the MR has one or more active delegated prefixes, the MR initiates
   a DHCPv6 message exchange with a DHCPv6 Rebind message as described
   in section 18.1.2 of RFC 3315 and section 12.1 of RFC 3633.

3.2.  Use of MR-HA tunnel for DHCPv6 messages

   The DHCPv6 specification requires the use of link-local unicast and
   link-local scope multicast addresses in DHCPv6 messages (except in
   certain cases as defined in section 22.12 of the DHCPv6
   specification).  Section 10.4.2 of the mobile IPv6 specification
   describes forwarding of intercepted packets, and the third paragraph
   of that section begins:


      However, packets addressed to the mobile node's link-local address
      MUST NOT be tunneled to the mobile node.


   The DHCPv6 messages exchanged between the HA and the MR originate
   only with the HA and the MR, and therefore are not "intercepted
   packets" and may be sent between the HA and the MR through the
   tunnel.

   Even though the MR-HA tunnel is a point to point connection, the MR
   SHOULD use multicast DHCPv6 messages as described in RFC 3315 over
   that tunnel.

3.3.  DHCPv6 Relay Agent for transmission of DHCPv6 messages

   A DHPCv6 relay agent function [RFC3315] can be used as an alternative
   to multicast DHCPv6 messages over the tunnel between the MR and the
   HA.  In this configuration, the relay agent function is co-located in
   the MR with the DHCPv6 client function.  Rather than using multicast
   to send DHCPv6 messages through the tunnel to the DHCPv6 server, the
   DHCPv6 client in the MR hands any outbound DHCPv6 messages to the co-
   located relay agent.  Responses from the DHCPv6 server are delivered
   to the relay agent function in the MR, which extracts the
   encapsulated message and delivers it to the DHCPv6 client in the MR.

3.3.1.  Relay agent configuration

   The use of the relay agent function in the MR allows the MR to
   unicast DHCPv6 messages to the DHCPv6 server.  The relay agent must
   be configured with the address of the DHCPv6 server or another DHCPv6
   relay agent that will forward message on to a DHCPv6 server.  For the
   purposes of NEMO, the relay agent assumes that the HA for the MR



Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


   hosts the next hop in the path the to the DHCPv6 server: either the
   DHCPv6 server or a relay agent that will forward message to the
   DHCPv6 server.  Therefore, if the MR acts as a DHCPv6 relay agent,
   the MR MUST configure the DHCPv6 relay agent to forward DHCPv6
   messages to the HA.

3.3.2.  Transmission of DHCPv6 messages

   In this configuration, when the DHCPv6 client in the MR sends a
   message, it hands the message to the DHCPv6 relay agent in the MR.
   The way in which this handoff takes place is beyond the scope of this
   document.  The relay agent encapsulates the message from the client
   according to RFC 3315 in a Relay-forward message and sends the
   resulting DHCPv6 message to the HA.  The relay agent sets the fields
   in the Relay-forward message as follows:

   msg-type       RELAY-FORW

   hop-count      1

   link-address   A non-link-local address from the MR interface to the
                  tunnel between the HA and MR

   peer-address   A non-link-local address from the MR interface to the
                  tunnel between the HA and MR

   options        MUST include a "Relay Message option" [RFC3315]; MAY
                  include other options added by the relay agent.

3.3.3.  Receipt of DHCPv6 messages

   In this configuration, messages from the DHCPv6 server will be
   returned to the DHCPv6 relay agent, with the message for the DHCPv6
   client encapsulated in the Relay Message option [RFC3315] in a Relay-
   reply message.  The relay agent function extracts the message for the
   client from the Relay Message option and hands the message to the
   DHCPv6 client in the MR.  The way in which this handoff takes place
   is beyond the scope of this document.

3.4.  Exchanging DHCPv6 messages when MR is at home

   When the MR is on its home link, the HA uses the home link to
   exchange DHCPv6PD messages with the MR.  It is the responsibility of
   the implementation to determine when the MR is on its home link and
   to avoid use of any existing tunnel.






Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


3.5.  Selecting an HA that provides DHCPv6PD

   Not all nodes that are willing to act as an HA are required to
   provide DHCPv6PD.  Therefore, when selecting an HA, a MR that
   requires DHCPv6PD service must identify an HA that will provide the
   service.  The MR can determine if an HA provides DHCPv6PD by
   initiating a DHCPv6 message exchange in which the MR requests
   delegated prefix(es).  If the HA does not respond or responds but
   does not delegate any prefix(es) in its response, the MR assumes that
   the HA does not provide DHCPv6PD service.  The MR continues to query
   all candidate HAs until it finds an HA that provides DHCPv6PD.

   Querying an HA to determine if it provides DHCPv6PD requires a small
   modification to the operation of DHCPv6 as described in RFC 3315.
   Under normal circumstances, a host will continue to send DHCPv6
   Solicit messages until it receives a response (see Section 17 of RFC
   3315).  However, an HA may choose not to respond to the Solicit
   messages from the MR because the HA does not provide DHCPv6.
   Therefore, when querying an HA to determine if the HA provides
   DHCPv6PD service, the MR MUST discontinue sending Solicit messages to
   the HA after sending 6 Solicit messages, and conclude that the HA
   will not provide DHCPv6PD service.

   The MR may choose to probe the HAs for DHCPv6PD service sequentially
   or in parallel.

3.6.  Minimizing DHCPv6PD messages

   DHCPv6PD in a Mobile Network can be combined with the Rapid Commit
   option [RFC3315] to provide DHCPv6 prefix delegation with a two
   message exchange between the mobile node and the DHCPv6PD DR.

3.7.  Location of DHCPv6PD Delegating Router function

   Support of DHCPv6PD for a Mobile Network is optional.

   The use of a DHCPv6 relay agent in DHCPv6PD may require "a protocol
   or other out-of-band communication to add routing information for
   delegated prefixes into the provider edge router" (section 14 of RFC
   3633).  If the DHCPv6PD DR function is implemented in the HA for the
   MR, no relay agent function is required.

   It may be desirable to use a single DR to manage RRs in a network
   with multiple HAs.  In this scenario, the HAs will act as DHCP relay
   agents, forwarding messages between the RRs and the DR.

   Use of the DHCPv6 relay agent function with DHCPv6PD requires that
   there be some mechanism through which routing information for the



Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


   delegated prefixes can be added to the appropriate routing
   infrastructure.  If the HA is acting as a DHCPv6 relay agent, the HA
   SHOULD add a route to the delegated prefix and advertise that route
   after receiving a binding update for the prefix from the RR
   [RFC3963].

   In particular, if the MR uses NEMO explicit mode, then it must add
   the delegated prefix to the prefix list in the Binding Update
   messages.  If the binding cache is cleared before the prefix valid
   lifetime, the MR might bind that prefix again using explicit mode,
   till the lifetime expires.

   In implicit mode, the HA must save the delegated prefix with the
   binding cache entry (BDE) of the Mobile Router.  When the BCE is
   cleared, the HA loses the information about the delegated prefix.
   Because the MR will use DHCPv6 when it reestablishes its tunnel to
   the HA (see Section 3.1), the HA will be able to add the delegated
   prefix back to the BCE.

   At the time this draft was written, one way in which a DR can
   explicitly notify a relay agent about delegated prefixes, is to use
   the "DHCP Relay Agent Assignment Notification Option"
   [I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-agentopt-delegate].

   Another alternative, if the RR is part of the same administrative
   domain as the home network to which it is attached through the HA,
   and the RR can be trusted, the RR can use a routing protocol like
   OSPF to advertise any delegated prefixes.

   NEMO explicit mode is recommended to take advantage of the function
   already defined for NEMO.

3.8.  Other DHCPv6 functions

   The DHCPv6 messages exchanged between the MR and the HA may also be
   used for other DHCPv6 functions in addition to DHCPv6PD.  For
   example, the HA may assign global addresses to the MR and may pass
   other configuration information such as a list of available DNS
   recursive name servers [RFC3646] to the MR using the same DHCPv6
   messages as used for DHCPV6PD.

   The HA may act as a DHCPv6 relay agent for MHs while it acts as a DR
   for MRs.


4.  Security Considerations

   This document describes the use of DHCPv6 for prefix delegation in



Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


   Mobile Networks.  It does not introduce any additional security
   considerations for DHCPv6 beyond those described in the "Security
   Considerations" section of the DHCPv6 base specification [RFC3315]
   and the "Security Considerations" of the DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation
   specification [RFC3633].

   The use of DHCPv6, as described in this document, requires only
   message integrity protection, which can be provided by the mobile
   network infrastructure between the MR and the HA.

   If the network infrastructure connecting the various communicating
   nodes does not provide message integrity and source authentication
   for the DHCPv6PD messages, HAs and MRs SHOULD use DHCPv6
   authentication as described in section "Authentication of DHCP
   messages" of the DHCPv6 specification [RFC3315], to guard against
   attacks mounted through prefix delegation.

   If the HA and DHCPv6 PD functions are not provided by the same
   physical node, the HA will act as a DHCPv6 relay agent between the MR
   and the DHCPv6 server.  In this scenario, the mobile network
   infrastructure will only protect the DHCPv6 traffic between the RR
   (MR) and the relay agent (HA).  The following text, based on Section
   21.1 of RFC 3315, describes how appropriate security can be provided
   between a DHCPv6 relay agent and server.

      DHCPv6 relay agents and servers MAY use IPsec mechanisms for IPv6
      [RFC2401] to exchange messages securely.  DHCPv6 relay agents and
      servers that support secure relay agent to server or relay agent
      to relay agent communication use IPsec under the following
      conditions:

      Selectors       DHCPv6 relay agents are manually configured with
                      the addresses of the DHCPv6 server to which DHCPv6
                      messages are to be forwarded.  Each DHCPv6 server
                      that will be using IPsec for securing DHCPv6
                      messages must also be configured with a list of
                      the DHCPv6 relay agents to which messages will be
                      returned.  The selectors for the DHCPv6 relay
                      agents and servers will be the pairs of addresses
                      defining DHCPv6 relay agents and servers that
                      exchange DHCP messages on the DHCPv6 UDP ports 546
                      and 547.

      Mode            DHCPv6 relay agents and servers use transport mode
                      and ESP.  The information in DHCPv6 messages is
                      not generally considered confidential, so
                      encryption need not be used (i.e., NULL encryption
                      can be used).



Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


      Key management  If the HA providing the DHCPv6 relay agent
                      function and the DHCPv6 servers are both
                      administered by the same organization, public key
                      schemes are not necessary.  Because the relay
                      agents and servers must be manually configured,
                      manually configured key management may suffice,
                      but does not provide defense against replayed
                      messages.  Accordingly, IKE with preshared secrets
                      SHOULD be supported.

                      Discussion: If NEMO may be deployed with the HA
                                  and the DHCPv6 server in different
                                  administrative domains, this text
                                  should be extended to include the use
                                  of IKE with public keys.

      Security policy DHCPv6 messages between relay agents and servers
                      should only be accepted from DHCPv6 peers as
                      identified in the local configuration.

      Authentication  Shared keys, indexed to the source IP address of
                      the received DHCPv6 message, are adequate in this
                      application.


5.  IANA Considerations

   This document describes the use of DHCPv6 for prefix delegation in
   Mobile Networks.  It does not introduce any additional IANA
   considerations.


6.  Change Log

   This section MUST be removed before this document is published as an
   RFC.

6.1.  Revision -00

   This document is based on draft-ietf-nemo-dhcpv6-pd-03 and includes
   the use of the DHCPv6 relay agent in the MR, as described in
   Section 3.3, from draft-dupont-mext-dhcrelay-00.

6.2.  Revision -01

   Added detail in Section 4, "Security Considerations", describing
   protection required for DHCPv6 and a mechanism for protecting traffic
   between the DHCPv6 relay agent and server.



Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


   Corrected minor typos.

6.3.  Revision -02

   Removed text describing extensions to DHAAD for discovery of HA that
   will provide PD.

   Added Section 3.5, "Selecting an HA that provides DHCPv6PD," which
   describes how an MR can discover DHCPv6PD service through polling of
   multiple HAs.

   Added text to Section 4, "Security Considerations", giving detail
   about the use of IPsec.


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

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

   [RFC2401]  Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
              Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998.

   [RFC3315]  Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
              and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
              IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.

   [RFC3633]  Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic
              Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633,
              December 2003.

   [RFC3646]  Droms, R., "DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host
              Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3646,
              December 2003.

   [RFC3775]  Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.

   [RFC3963]  Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., and P.
              Thubert, "Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol",
              RFC 3963, January 2005.

   [RFC4291]  Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
              Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.





Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-agentopt-delegate]
              Droms, R., Volz, B., and O. Troan, "DHCPv6 Relay Agent
              Assignment Notification (RAAN) Option",
              draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-agentopt-delegate-04 (work in
              progress), July 2009.

   [RFC4885]  Ernst, T. and H-Y. Lach, "Network Mobility Support
              Terminology", RFC 4885, July 2007.

   [RFC4886]  Ernst, T., "Network Mobility Support Goals and
              Requirements", RFC 4886, July 2007.


Authors' Addresses

   Ralph Droms
   Cisco
   1414 Massachusetts Avenue
   Boxborough, MA  01719
   USA

   Phone: +1 978.936.1674
   Email: rdroms@cisco.com


   Pascal Thubert
   Cisco
   Village d'Entreprises Green Side
   400, Avenue Roumanille
   Biot - Sophia Antipolis  06410
   FRANCE

   Email: pthubert@cisco.com


   Francis Dupont
   ISC

   Email: Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr










Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft      DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO       October 2009


   Wassim Haddad
   Ericsson
   6210 Spine Road
   Boulder, CO  80301
   USA

   Phone: +1 303.473.6963
   Email: wmhaddad@gmail.com











































Droms, et al.            Expires April 29, 2010                [Page 13]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/