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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 RFC 6746

Internet Draft                                           RJ Atkinson
draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-v4opts-06.txt                         Consultant
Expires:  10 JAN 2013                                      SN Bhatti
Category: Experimental                                 U. St Andrews
                                                        10 July 2012

                        IPv4 Options for ILNPv4
                   draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-v4opts-06.txt

Status of this Memo

   Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

   Copyright (c) 2012 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 (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.

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or
   IETF Contributions published or made publicly available
   before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright
   in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the
   right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF
   Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the
   person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this
   document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process,
   and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF
   Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC
   or to translate it into languages other than English.

   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



Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 1]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


   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/1id-abstracts.html

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This document is not on the IETF standards-track and does not
   specify any level of standard. This document merely provides
   information for the Internet community.

   This document is part of the ILNP document set, and has had
   extensive review within the IRTF Routing Research Group.  ILNP is
   one of the recommendations made by the RG Chairs. Separately,
   various refereed research papers on ILNP have also been published
   during this decade. So the ideas contained herein have had much
   broader review than the IRTF Routing RG. The views in this
   document were considered controversial by the Routing RG, but the
   RG reached a consensus that the document still should be
   published. The Routing RG has had remarkably little consensus on
   anything, so virtually all Routing RG outputs are considered
   controversial.

Abstract

   This document defines two new IPv4 options that are used only with
   ILNP for IPv4 (ILNPv4).  ILNP is is an experimental, evolutionary
   enhancement to IP. This document is a product of the IRTF Routing
   RG.

Table of Contents - ### to be updated


     1. Introduction.............................2
     2. IPv4 Options for ILNPv4..................3
     3. Security Considerations..................7
     4. IANA Considerations......................7
     5. References...............................8

1. INTRODUCTION

   At present, the Internet research and development community are
   exploring various approaches to evolving the Internet
   Architecture to solve a variety of issues including, but not
   limited to, scalability of inter-domain routing [RFC4984]. A wide



Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 2]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


   range of other issues (e.g. site multi-homing, node multi-homing,
   site/subnet mobility, node mobility) are also active concerns at
   present. Several different classes of evolution are being
   considered by the Internet research & development community. One
   class is often called "Map and Encapsulate", where traffic would
   be mapped and then tunnelled through the inter-domain core of the
   Internet. Another class being considered is sometimes known as
   "Identifier/Locator Split". This document relates to a proposal
   that is in the latter class of evolutionary approaches.

   The Identifier Locator Network Protocol (ILNP) is an proposal for
   evolving the Internet Architecture.  It differs from the current
   Internet Architecture primarily by deprecating the concept of an
   IP Address, and instead defining two new objects, each having
   crisp syntax and semantics.  The first new object is the Locator,
   a topology-dependent name for a subnetwork.  The other new object
   is the Identifier, which provides a topology-independent name for
   a node.

1.1 Document Roadmap

   This document describes a new IPv4 Nonce Option used by ILNPv4
   nodes to carry a security nonce to prevent off-path attacks
   against ILNP ICMP messages and also defines a new IPv4
   Identifier Option used by ILNPv4 nodes.

   The ILNP architecture can have more than one engineering
   instantiation. For example, one can imagine a "clean-slate"
   engineering design based on the ILNP architecture. In separate
   documents, we describe two specific engineering instances of
   ILNP. The term ILNPv6 refers precisely to an instance of ILNP that
   is based upon, and backwards compatible with, IPv6. The term ILNPv4
   refers precisely to an instance of ILNP that is based upon, and
   backwards compatible with, IPv4.

   Many engineering aspects common to both ILNPv4 and ILNPv6 are
   described in [ILNP-ENG]. A full engineering specification for
   either ILNPv6 or ILNPv4 is beyond the scope of this document.

   Readers are referred to other related ILNP documents for details
   not described here:

    a) [ILNP-ARCH] is the main architectural description of ILNP,
       including the concept of operations.

    b) [ILNP-ENG] describes engineering and implementation
       considerations that are common to both ILNPv4 and ILNPv6.




Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 3]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


    c) [ILNP-DNS] defines additional DNS resource records that
       support ILNP.

    d) [ILNP-ICMPv6] defines a new ICMPv6 Locator Update message
       used by an ILNP node to inform its correspondent nodes
       of any changes to its set of valid Locators.

    e) [ILNP-NONCEv6] defines a new IPv6 Nonce Destination Option
       used by ILNPv6 nodes (1) to indicate to ILNP correspondent
       nodes (by inclusion within the initial packets of an ILNP
       session) that the node is operating in the ILNP mode and
       (2) to prevent off-path attacks against ILNP ICMP messages.
       This Nonce is used, for example, with all ILNP ICMPv6
       Locator Update messages that are exchanged among ILNP
       correspondent nodes.

    f) [ILNP-ICMPv4] defines a new ICMPv4 Locator Update message
       used by an ILNP node to inform its correspondent nodes
       of any changes to its set of valid Locators.

    g) [ILNP-ARP] describes extensions to ARP for use with ILNPv4.

    h) [ILNP-ADV] describes optional engineering and deployment
       functions for ILNP. These are not required for the operation
       or use of ILNP and are provided as additional options.


1.2  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]


2.  IPv4 Options for ILNPv4

   ILNP for IPv4 (ILNPv4) is merely a different instantiation of the
   ILNP architecture, so it retains the crisp distinction between
   the Locator and the Identifier.  As with ILNP for IPv6 (ILNPv6),
   when ILNPv4 is used for a network-layer session, the upper-layer
   protocols (e.g. TCP/UDP pseudo-header checksum, IPsec Security
   Association) bind only to the Identifiers, never to the Locators.
   As with ILNPv6, only the Locator values are used for routing and
   forwarding ILNPv4 packets.

   However, just as the packet format for IPv4 is different to IPv6,
   so the engineering details for ILNPv4 are different also. Just as



Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 4]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


   ILNPv6 is carefully engineered to be backwards-compatible with
   IPv6, ILNPv4 is carefully engineered to be backwards-compatible
   with IPv4.

   Each of these options MUST be copied upon fragmentation.  Each of
   these options is used for control, so uses Option Class 0.

   Originally, these two options were specified to use separate IP
   option numbers.  However, only 1 IP option (decimal 158) has been
   defined for experimental use with properties of MUST COPY and
   CONTROL.[RFC4727]  So these two options have been re-worked to share
   that same IP option number (158).   To distinguish between
   the two actual options, the unsigned 8-bit field ILNPv4_OPT
   inside this option is examined.

   It is important for implementers to understand that IP Option 158
   is not uniquely allocated to ILNPv4.  Other IPv4-related
   experiments might be using that IP option value for different IP
   options having different IP option formats.

2.1  ILNPv4 Packet Format

   The Source IP Address in the IPv4 header becomes the Source
   ILNPv4 Locator value, while the Destination IP Address of the
   IPv4 header becomes the Destination ILNPv4 Locator value.  Of
   course, backwards compatibility requirements mean that ILNPv4
   Locators use the same number space as IPv4 routing prefixes.

   ILNPv4 uses the same 64-bit Identifier, with the same modified
   EUI-64 syntax, as ILNPv6.  Because the IPv4 address fields are
   much smaller than the IPv6 address fields, ILNPv4 cannot carry
   the Identifier values in the fixed portion of the IPv4 header.
   The obvious two ways to carry the ILNP Identifier with ILNPv4
   are either as an IPv4 Option or as an IPv6-style Extension Header
   placed after the IPv4 header and before the upper-layer protocol
   (e.g. OSPF, TCP, UDP, SCTP).

   Currently deployed IPv4 routers from multiple router vendors use
   packet forwarding silicon that is able to parse past IPv4 options
   to examine the upper-layer protocol header at wire-speed on
   reasonably fast (e.g. 1 Gbps or better) network interfaces. By
   contrast, no existing IPv4-capable packet forwarding silicon is
   able to parse past a new Extension Header for IPv4.  Hence, for
   engineering reasons, ILNPv4 uses a new IPv4 Option to carry the
   Identifier values.  Another new IPv4 option also carries a nonce
   value, performing the same function for ILNPv4 as the IPv6 Nonce
   Destination Option [ILNP-NONCE6] performs for ILNPv6.




Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 5]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |Version|  IHL  |Type of Service|          Total Length         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |         Identification        |Flags|      Fragment Offset    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |  Time to Live |    Protocol   |         Header Checksum       |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                 Source Locator (32 bits)                      |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |              Destination Locator (32 bits)                    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |      OT=158   |     OL=5      |      0x00     |ILNPv4_OPT=0x01|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    +                      Source Identifier                        +
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                                                               |
    +                    Destination Identifier                     +
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |     OT=158    |     OL=2      |      0x00     |ILNPv4_OPT=0x02|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                      top 32 bits of nonce                     |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                     lower 32 bits of nonce                    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Figure 1:  ILNPv4 header with ILNP ID option
                                  and ILNP Nonce option.

           Notation for Figure 1:
                    IHL:  Internet Header Length
                    OT:   Option Type
                    OL:   Option Length


2.2  ILNP Identifier Option for IPv4

     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |     OT=158    |     OL=20     |      0x00     |ILNPv4_OPT=0x01|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                      Source Identifier                        |
    |                                                               |



Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 6]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                    Destination Identifier                     |
    |                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Figure 2: ILNP Identifier Option for IPv4

           Notation for Figure 2:
                    OT:   Option Type
                    OL:   Option Length

   RFC-791, Page 15 specifies that the Option Length is measured in
   words and includes the Option Type octet, the Option Length
   octet, and the option data octets.

   The Source Identifier and Destination Identifier are unsigned
   64-bit integers. [ILNP-ENG] specifies the syntax, semantics, and
   generation of ILNP Identifier values.  Using the same syntax and
   semantics for all instantiations of ILNP Identifiers simplifies
   specification and implementation, while also facilitating
   translation or transition between ILNPv4 and ILNPv6 should that
   be desirable in future.

   This IP option MUST NOT be present in an IPv4 packet unless the
   packet is part of an ILNPv4 session.  ILNPv4 sessions MUST
   include this option in the first few packets of each ILNPv4
   session, and MAY include this option in all packets of the ILNPv4
   session.  It is RECOMMENDED to include this option in all packets
   of the ILNPv4 session if packet loss is higher than normal.

2.3  ILNP Nonce Option for IPv4

     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |     OT=158    |     OL=2      |      0x00     |ILNPv4_OPT=0x02|
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                      top 32 bits of nonce                     |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                     lower 32 bits of nonce                    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

           Figure 3: ILNP Nonce Option for IPv4

           Notation for Figure 3:
                    OT:   Option Type
                    OL:   Option Length




Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 7]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


   This option contains a 64-bit ILNP Nonce.  As noted in [ILNP-
   ARCH] and [ILNP-ENG], all ILNP Nonce values are unidirectional.
   This means, for example, that when TCP is in use the underlying
   ILNPv4 session will have two different NONCE values: one from
   Initiator to Responder and another from Responder to
   Initiator. The ILNP Nonce is used to provide non-cryptographic
   protection against off-path attacks (e.g. forged ICMP messages
   from the remote end of a TCP session).

   Each NONCE value MUST be unpredictable (i.e. cryptographically
   random).  Guidance to implementers on generating
   cryptographically random values is provided in [RFC4086].

   This IP option MUST NOT be present in an IPv4 packet unless the
   packet is part of an ILNPv4 session.  ILNPv4 nodes MUST include
   this option in the first few packets of each ILNP session, MUST
   include this option in all ICMP messages generated by endpoints
   participating in an ILNP session, and MAY include this option in
   all packets of an ILNPv4 session.


3.  SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS

   Security considerations for the overall ILNP Architecture are
   described in [ILNP-ARCH].  Additional common security
   considerations are described in [ILNP-ENG].  This section
   describes security considerations specific to ILNPv4 topics
   discussed in this document.

   If the ILNP Nonce value is predictable, then an off-path attacker
   might be able to forge data or control packets.  This risk also
   is mitigated by the existing common practice of IP Source Address
   filtering [RFC2827] [RFC3704].

   IP Security for ILNP [ILNP-ENG] [RFC4301] provides cryptographic
   protection for ILNP data and control packets. The ILNP Nonce
   option is required in the circumstances described in Section 3,
   even if IP Security is also in use.  Deployments of ILNPv4 in
   high-threat environments SHOULD use IP Security for additional
   risk reduction.

   This option is intended to be used primarily end-to-end between a
   source node and a destination node.  However, unlike IPv6, IPv4
   does not specify a method to distinguish between options with
   hop-by-hop behaviour versus end-to-end behaviour.

   [ID-IPv4-OPT-FILTERING] provides general discussion of potential
   operational issues with IPv4 options, along with specific advice



Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 8]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


   for handling several specific IPv4 options.  Further, many
   deployed modern IP routers (both IPv4 and IPv6) have been
   explicitly configured to ignore all IP options, even including
   the "Router Alert" option, when forwarding packets not addressed
   to the router itself.  Reports indicate this has been done to
   preclude use of IP options as a (Distributed) Denial-of-Service
   (D)DoS attack vector on backbone routers.

4.  IANA CONSIDERATIONS

   This document makes no request of IANA.

   If in future the IETF decided to standardise ILNPv4, then
   allocation of two unique Header Option values to ILNPv4, one for
   the Identifier option and one for the Nonce option, would be
   sensible.


5.  REFERENCES

   This document has both Normative and Informational References.

5.1  Normative References

   [ILNP-ARCH]  R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti, "ILNP Architecture",
                draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-arch, May 2012.

   [ILNP-ENG]   R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti, "ILNP Engineering
                Considerations", draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-eng, May 2012.

   [ILNP-DNS]   R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti, "DNS Resource Records
                for ILNP", draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-dns, May 2012.

   [ILNP-ICMPv4] R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti, "ICMP Locator Update
               message for ILNPv4", draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-icmpv4,
               May 2012.

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

   [RFC4301]  S. Kent and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for
               the Internet Protocol", RFC-4301, December 2005.

   [RFC4727]   B. Fenner, "Experimental Values in IPv4, IPv6, ICMPv4,
               ICMPv6, UDP, and TCP Headers", RFC 4727, Nov 2006.





Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                          [Page 9]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


   [ILNP-ARCH]    R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti,
                  "ILNP Architectural Description",
                  draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-arch, 10 July 2012.

   [ILNP-ARP]   R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti, "ARP Extension for
                ILNPv4", draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-arp, 10 July 2012.

   [ILNP-DNS]     R.J. Atkinson, S.N. Bhatti, & S Rose,
                  "DNS Resource Records for ILNP",
                  draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-dns, 10 July 2012.

   [ILNP-ENG]     R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti,
                  "ILNP Engineering and Implementation Considerations",
                  draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-eng, 10 July 2012.

   [ILNP-ICMPv4]  R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti,
                  "ICMPv4 Locator Update message"
                  draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-icmpv4, 10 July 2012.

5.2  Informative References

   [ID-IPv4-OPT-FILTERING] F. Gont, R. Atkinson, and C. Pignatero,
               "Recommendations on Filtering of IPv4 Packets with
               IPv4 options", draft-gont-opsec-ip-options-filtering,
               March 2012.

   [RFC2780]  S. Bradner & V. Paxson, "IANA Allocation Guidelines
              for Values in the Internet Protocol and Related
              Headers", RFC 2780, March 2000.

   [RFC2827]  P. Ferguson and D. Senie, "Network Ingress
               Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks
               which employ IP Source Address Spoofing",
               RFC-2827, May 2000.

   [RFC3704]  F. Baker and P. Savola, "Ingress Filtering for
               Multihomed Networks", RFC-3704, March 2004.

   [RFC4086]  D. Eastlake 3rd, J. Schiller, and S. Crocker,
               "Randomness Requirements for Security", RFC-4086,
               June 2005.

   [ILNP-ADV]    R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti,
                 "Optional Advanced Deployment Scenarios for ILNP",
                 draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-adv, 10 July 2012.

   [ILNP-ICMPv6]  R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti,
                  "ICMPv6 Locator Update message"



Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                         [Page 10]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


                  draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-icmpv6, 10 July 2012.

   [ILNP-NONCEv6] R.J. Atkinson & S.N. Bhatti,
                 "IPv6 Nonce Destination Option for ILNPv6",
                 draft-irtf-rrg-ilnp-noncev6, 10 July 2012.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

   Steve Blake, Stephane Bortzmeyer, Mohamed Boucadair, Noel
   Chiappa, Wes George, Steve Hailes, Joel Halpern, Mark Handley,
   Volker Hilt, Paul Jakma, Dae-Young Kim, Tony Li, Yakov Rehkter,
   Bruce Simpson, Robin Whittle and John Wroclawski (in alphabetical
   order) provided review and feedback on earlier versions of this
   document. Steve Blake provided an especially thorough review of
   an early version of the entire ILNP document set, which was
   extremely helpful. We also wish to thank the anonymous reviewers
   of the various ILNP papers for their feedback.

   Roy Arends provided expert guidance on technical and procedural
   aspects of DNS issues.

RFC EDITOR NOTE

   This section is to be removed prior to publication.

   Please note that this document is written in British English, so
   British English spelling is used throughout. This is consistent
   with existing practice in several other RFCs, for example
   RFC-5887.

   This document tries to be very careful with history, in the
   interest of correctly crediting ideas to their earliest
   identifiable author(s). So in several places the first published
   RFC about a topic is cited rather than the most recent published
   RFC about that topic.

AUTHOR'S ADDRESS

   RJ Atkinson
   Consultant
   San Jose, CA,
   95125 USA

   Email:     rja.lists@gmail.com


   SN Bhatti
   School of Computer Science



Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                         [Page 11]

Internet Draft     ILNP-IPv4-Opts     10 JUL 2012


   University of St Andrews
   North Haugh, St Andrews
   Fife, Scotland
   KY16 9SX, UK

   Email: saleem@cs.st-andrews.ac.uk

   Expires: 10 JAN 2013











































Atkinson & Bhatti  Expires in 6 months                         [Page 12]


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