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

Versions: (draft-bvtm-dhc-mac-assign) 00 01 02 03 04 05 09

Dynamic Host Configuration (DHC)                                 B. Volz
Internet-Draft                                                     Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track                            T. Mrugalski
Expires: March 7, 2021                                               ISC
                                                           CJ. Bernardos
                                                                    UC3M
                                                       September 3, 2020


          Link-Layer Addresses Assignment Mechanism for DHCPv6
                      draft-ietf-dhc-mac-assign-09

Abstract

   In certain environments, e.g., large scale virtualization
   deployments, new devices are created in an automated manner.  Such
   devices may have their link-layer addresses assigned in an automated
   fashion.  With sufficient scale, the likelihood of a collision using
   random assignment without duplication detection is not acceptable.
   Therefore an allocation mechanism is required.  This draft proposes
   an extension to DHCPv6 that allows a scalable approach to link-layer
   address assignments where preassigned link-layer address assignments
   (such as by a manufacturer) are not possible or unnecessary.

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 March 7, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 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



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   (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.  Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Deployment scenarios and mechanism overview . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Proxy client mode scenario  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.2.  Direct client mode scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.3.  Mechanism Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Design Assumptions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Information Encoding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Requesting Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  Renewing Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  Releasing Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   10. Option Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     10.1.  Identity Association for Link-Layer Addresses Option . .  10
     10.2.  Link-Layer Addresses Option  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   11. Selecting Link-Layer Addresses for Assignment to an IA_LL . .  14
   12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   13. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   14. Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   15. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   16. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     16.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     16.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   Appendix A.  IEEE 802c Summary  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19

1.  Introduction

   There are several deployment types that deal with a large number of
   devices that need to be initialized.  One of them is a scenario where
   virtual machines (VMs) are created on a massive scale.  Typically the
   new VM instances are assigned a link-layer address, but random
   assignment does not scale well due to the risk of a collision (see
   Appendix A.1 of [RFC4429]).  Another use case is IoT (Internet of
   Things) devices (see [RFC7228]).  The huge number of such devices
   could strain the IEEE's available OUI (Organizationally Unique
   Identifier) global address space.  While there is typically no need
   to provide global link-layer address uniqueness for such devices, a



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   link-layer assignment mechanism allows for conflicts to be avoided
   inside an administrative domain.  For those reasons, it is desired to
   have some form of mechanism that would be able to assign locally
   unique MAC (media access control) addresses.

   This document proposes a new mechanism that extends DHCPv6 operation
   to handle link-layer address assignments.

   Since DHCPv6 ([RFC8415]) is a protocol that can allocate various
   types of resources (non-temporary addresses, temporary addresses,
   prefixes, as well as many options) and has the necessary
   infrastructure to maintain such allocations (numerous server and
   client implementations, large deployed relay infrastructure, and
   supportive solutions such as leasequery and failover), it is a good
   candidate to address the desired functionality.

   While this document presents a design that should be usable for any
   link-layer address type, some of the details are specific to IEEE 802
   48-bit MAC addresses [IEEEStd802].  Future documents may provide
   specifics for other link-layer address types.

   IEEE 802 originally set aside half of the 48-bit MAC address space
   for local use (where the U/L bit is set to 1).  In 2017, IEEE
   published an amendment [IEEEStd802c] that divides this space into
   quadrants with differentied address rules.  More details are in
   Appendix A.

   IEEE is also developing protocols and procedures for assignment of
   locally unique addresses (IEEE 802.1CQ).  This work may serve as an
   alternative protocol for assignment.  For additional background, see
   [IEEE-P802.1CQ-Project].

2.  Requirements

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

3.  Terminology

   The DHCP terminology relevant to this specification from [RFC8415]
   applies here.  The following definitions either modify those
   definitions as to how they are used in this document or define new
   terminology used herein.





Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   address       Unless specified otherwise, an address means a link-
                 layer (or MAC) address, as specified in [IEEEStd802].
                 The address is typically six octets long, but some
                 network architectures may use different lengths.

   address block A number of consecutive link-layer addresses.  An
                 address block is expressed as a first address plus a
                 number that designates the number of additional (extra)
                 addresses.  A single address can be represented by the
                 address itself and zero extra addresses.

   client        A node that is interested in obtaining link-layer
                 addresses.  It implements the basic DHCP mechanisms
                 needed by a DHCP client as described in [RFC8415] and
                 supports the new options (IA_LL and LLADDR, see below)
                 specified in this document.  The client may or may not
                 support IPv6 address assignment and prefix delegation
                 as specified in [RFC8415].

   IA_LL         Identity Association for Link-Layer Address: an
                 identity association (IA) used to request or assign
                 link-layer addresses.  See Section 10.1 for details on
                 the IA_LL option.

   LLADDR        Link-layer address option that is used to request or
                 assign a block of link-layer addresses.  See
                 Section 10.2 for details on the LLADDR option.

   server        A node that manages link-layer address allocation and
                 is able to respond to client queries.  It implements
                 basic DHCP server functionality as described in
                 [RFC8415] and supports the new options (IA_LL and
                 LLADDR) specified in this document.  The server may or
                 may not support IPv6 address assignment and prefix
                 delegation as specified in [RFC8415].

4.  Deployment scenarios and mechanism overview

   This mechanism is designed to be generic and usable in many
   deployments, but there are two scenarios it attempts to address in
   particular: (i) proxy client mode, and (ii) direct client mode.

4.1.  Proxy client mode scenario

   This mode is used when an entity acts as a DHCP client and requests
   available DHCP servers to assign one or more addresses (an address
   block), to be then assigned for use by the final end-devices.  Large-
   scale virtualization is one application scenario for proxy client



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   mode.  In such environments this entity is often called a hypervisor
   and is frequently required to spawn new VMs.  The hypervisor needs to
   assign new addresses to those machines.  The hypervisor does not use
   those addresses for itself, but rather uses them to create new VMs
   with appropriate addresses.  It is worth pointing out the cumulative
   nature of this scenario.  Over time, the hypervisor is likely to
   increase its address usage.  Some obsolete VMs will be deleted and
   their addresses are potentially eligible for reuse for new VMs.

4.2.  Direct client mode scenario

   This mode can be used when an entity acts as a DHCP client and
   requests available DHCP servers to assign one or more addresses (an
   address block) for its use.  This usage scenario is related to IoT,
   as described earlier (see Section 1).  Upon first boot, for each
   interface the device uses a temporary address, as described in
   [IEEEStd802.11] or to be described in IEEE 802.1CQ
   [IEEE-P802.1CQ-Project], to send initial DHCP packets to available
   DHCP servers wherein the device requests a single address for that
   network interface.  Once the server assigns an address, the device
   abandons its temporary address and uses the assigned (leased)
   address.

   Note that a client that operates as above that does not have a
   globally unique link-layer address on any of its interfaces MUST NOT
   use a link-layer based DUID (DHCP Unique Identifier).  For more
   details, refer to Section 11 of [RFC8415].

   Also, a client that operates as above may run into issues if the
   switch it is connected to prohibits or restricts link-layer address
   changes.  This may limit where this capability can be used, or may
   require the administrator to adjust the configuration of the
   switch(es) to allow a change in address.

4.3.  Mechanism Overview

   In all scenarios the protocol operates in fundamentally the same way.
   The device requesting an address, acting as a DHCP client, will send
   a Solicit message with a IA_LL option to all available DHCP servers.
   That IA_LL option MUST include a LLADDR option specifying the link-
   layer-type and link-layer-len and may include a specific address or
   address block as a hint for the server.  Each available server
   responds with either a Reply message with committed address(es) (if
   Rapid Commit was requested and honored) or an Advertise message with
   offered address(es).  The client selects a server's response as
   governed by [RFC8415].  If necessary, the client sends a Request
   message and the target server will then assign the address(es) and




Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   send a Reply message.  Once a Reply is received, the client can start
   using those address(es).

   Normal DHCP mechanisms are in use.  The client is expected to
   periodically renew the addresses as governed by T1 and T2 timers and
   stop using the address once the valid lifetime expires.  Renewals can
   be administratively disabled by the server sending "infinity" as the
   T1 and T2 values (see Section 7.7 of [RFC8415]).  An administrator
   may make the address assignment permanent by specifying use of the
   "infinity" valid lifetime, as defined in Section 7.7 of [RFC8415].

   The client can release addresses when they are no longer needed by
   sending a Release message (see Section 18.2.7 of [RFC8415]).

   Figure 9 in [RFC8415] shows a timeline diagram of the messages
   exchanged between a client and two servers for the typical lifecycle
   of one or more leases.

   Confirm and Information-Request messages are not used in link-layer
   address assignment.  Decline should technically never be needed, but
   see Section 11 for one situation where this message is needed.

   Clients implementing this mechanism SHOULD use the Rapid Commit
   option as specified in Section 5.1 and 18.2.1 of [RFC8415] to obtain
   addresses with a 2-message exchange when possible.

   Devices supporting this proposal MAY support the reconfigure
   mechanism, as defined in Section 18.2.11 of [RFC8415].  If supported
   by both server and client, the reconfigure mechanism allows the
   administrator to immediately notify clients that the configuration
   has changed and triggers retrieval of relevant changes immediately,
   rather than after the T1 timer elapses.  Since this mechanism
   requires implementation of Reconfigure Key Authentication Protocol
   (See Section 20.4 of [RFC8415]), small-footprint devices may choose
   to not support it.

5.  Design Assumptions

   One of the essential aspects of this mechanism is its cumulative
   nature, especially in the hypervisor scenario.  The server-client
   relationship does not look like other DHCP transactions in the
   hypervisor scenario.  In a typical environment, there would be one
   server and a rather small number of hypervisors, possibly even only
   one.  However, over time the number of addresses requested by the
   hypervisor(s) will increase as more VMs are spawned.

   Another aspect crucial for efficient design is the observation that a
   single client acting as hypervisor will likely use thousands of



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   addresses.  An approach similar to what is used for IPv6 address or
   prefix assignment (IA container with all assigned addresses listed,
   one option for each address) would not work well.  Therefore the
   mechanism should operate on address blocks, rather than single
   values.  A single address can be treated as an address block with
   just one address.

   The DHCP mechanisms are reused to large degree, including message and
   option formats, transmission mechanisms, relay infrastructure and
   others.  However, a device wishing to support only link-layer address
   assignment is not required to support full DHCP.  In other words, the
   device may support only assignment of link-layer addresses, but not
   IPv6 addresses or prefixes.

6.  Information Encoding

   A client MUST send a LLADDR option encapsulated in an IA_LL option to
   specify the link-layer-type and link-layer-len values.  For link-
   layer-type 1 (Ethernet) and 6 (IEEE 802 Networks), a client sets the
   link-layer-address field to:

   1.  All zeroes if the client has no hint as to the starting address
       of the unicast address block.  This address has the IEEE 802
       individual/group bit set to 0 (individual).

   2.  Any other value to request a specific block of address starting
       with the specified address

   Encoding information for other link-layer-types may be added in the
   future by publishing an RFC that specifies those values.

   A client sets the extra-addresses field to either 0 for a single
   address or the size of the requested address block minus 1.

   A client MUST set the valid-lifetime field to 0 (this field MUST be
   ignored by the server).

7.  Requesting Addresses

   The addresses are assigned in blocks.  The smallest block is a single
   address.  To request an assignment, the client sends a Solicit
   message with an IA_LL option in the message.  The IA_LL option MUST
   contain a LLADDR option as specified in Section 6.

   The server, upon receiving an IA_LL option, inspects its content and
   may offer an address or addresses for each LLADDR option according to
   its policy.  The server MAY take into consideration the address block
   requested by the client in the LLADDR option.  However, the server



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   MAY choose to ignore some or all parameters of the requested address
   block.  In particular, the server may send a different starting
   address than requested, or a smaller number of addresses than
   requested.  The server sends back an Advertise message with an IA_LL
   option containing an LLADDR option that specifies the addresses being
   offered.  If the server is unable to provide any addresses it MUST
   return the IA_LL option containing a Status Code option (see
   Section 21.13 of [RFC8415]) with status set to NoAddrsAvail.

   Note: Servers that do not support the IA_LL option will ignore the
   option and not return it in Advertise (and Reply) messages.  Clients
   that send IA_LL options MUST treat this as if the server returned the
   NoAddrsAvail status for these IA_LL option(s).

   The client waits for available servers to send Advertise responses
   and picks one server as defined in Section 18.2.9 of [RFC8415].  The
   client then sends a Request message that includes the IA_LL container
   option with the LLADDR option copied from the Advertise message sent
   by the chosen server.

   The client MUST process the address block(s) returned in the
   Advertise, rather than what it included in the Solicit, and may
   consider the offered address block(s) in selecting the Advertise to
   accept.  The server may offer a smaller number of addresses or
   different addresses from those requested.  A client MUST NOT use
   resources returned in an Advertise message except to select a server
   and in sending the Request to that server; resources are only useable
   by a client when returned in a Reply message.

   Upon reception of a Request message with IA_LL container option, the
   server assigns the requested addresses.  The server allocates a block
   of addresses according to its configured policy.  The server MAY
   assign a different block or smaller block size than requested in the
   Request message.  The server then generates and sends a Reply message
   back to the client.

   Upon receiving a Reply message, the client parses the IA_LL container
   option and may start using all provided addresses.  It MUST restart
   its T1 and T2 timers using the values specified in the IA_LL option.

   The client MUST use the address block(s) returned in the Reply
   message, which may be smaller block(s) or with different address(es)
   than requested.

   A client that has included a Rapid Commit option in the Solicit may
   receive a Reply in response to the Solicit and skip the Advertise and
   Request steps above (see Section 18.2.1 of [RFC8415]).




Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   A client that changes its link-layer address on an interface SHOULD
   follow the recommendations in Section 7.2.6 of [RFC4861] to inform
   its neighbors of the new link-layer address quickly.

8.  Renewing Addresses

   Address renewals follow the normal DHCP renewals processing described
   in Section 18.2.4 of [RFC8415].  Once the T1 timer elapses, the
   client starts sending Renew messages with the IA_LL option containing
   a LLADDR option for the address block being renewed.  The server
   responds with a Reply message that contains the renewed address
   block.  The server MUST NOT shrink or expand the address block.  Once
   a block is assigned and has a non-zero valid lifetime, its size,
   starting address, and ending address MUST NOT change.

   If the requesting client needs additional addresses -- e.g., in the
   hypervisor scenario because addresses need to be assigned to new VMs
   -- it MUST send an IA_LL option with a different IAID to create
   another "container" for more addresses.

   If the client is unable to Renew before the T2 timer elapses, it
   starts sending Rebind messages as described in Section 18.2.5 of
   [RFC8415].

9.  Releasing Addresses

   The client may decide to release a leased address block.  A client
   MUST release the whole block in its entirety.  A client releases an
   address block by sending a Release message that includes an IA_LL
   option containing the LLADDR option for the address block to release.
   The Release transmission mechanism is described in Section 18.2.7 of
   [RFC8415].

   Note: If the client is releasing the link-layer address it is using,
   it MUST stop using this address before sending the Release message
   (as per [RFC8415]).  In order to send the Release message, the client
   MUST use another address (such as the one originally used to initiate
   DHCPv6 to provide an allocated link-layer address).

10.  Option Definitions

   This mechanism uses an approach similar to the existing mechanisms in
   DHCP.  There is one container option (the IA_LL option) that contains
   the actual address or addresses, represented by an LLADDR option.
   Each LLADDR option represents an address block, which is expressed as
   a first address with a number that specifies how many additional
   addresses are included.




Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


10.1.  Identity Association for Link-Layer Addresses Option

   The Identity Association for Link-Layer Addresses option (IA_LL
   option) is used to carry an IA_LL, the parameters associated with the
   IA_LL, and the address blocks associated with the IA_LL.

   The format of the IA_LL option is:

      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_LL         |          option-len           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                        IAID (4 octets)                        |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                          T1 (4 octets)                        |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                          T2 (4 octets)                        |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     .                                                               .
     .                         IA_LL-options                         .
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                       Figure 1: IA_LL Option Format

   option-code     OPTION_IA_LL (tbd1).

   option-len      12 + length of IA_LL-options field.

   IAID            The unique identifier for this IA_LL; the IAID must
                   be unique among the identifiers for all of this
                   client's IA_LLs.  The number space for IA_LL IAIDs is
                   separate from the number space for other IA option
                   types (i.e., IA_NA, IA_TA, and IA_PD).  A 4-octet
                   field containing an unsigned integer.

   T1              The time interval after which the client should
                   contact the server from which the addresses in the
                   IA_LL were obtained to extend the valid lifetime of
                   the addresses assigned to the IA_LL; T1 is a time
                   duration relative to the current time expressed in
                   units of seconds.  A 4-octet field containing an
                   unsigned integer.

   T2              The time interval after which the client should
                   contact any available server to extend the valid
                   lifetime of the addresses assigned to the IA_LL; T2



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


                   is a time duration relative to the current time
                   expressed in units of seconds.  A 4-octet field
                   containing an unsigned integer.

   IA_LL-options   Options associated with this IA_LL.  A variable
                   length field (12 octets less than the value in the
                   option-len field).

   An IA_LL option may only appear in the options area of a DHCP
   message.  A DHCP message may contain multiple IA_LL options (though
   each must have a unique IAID).

   The status of any operations involving this IA_LL is indicated in a
   Status Code option (see Section 21.13 of [RFC8415]) in the IA_LL-
   options field.

   Note that an IA_LL has no explicit "lifetime" or "lease length" of
   its own.  When the valid lifetimes of all of the addresses in an
   IA_LL have expired, the IA_LL can be considered as having expired.
   T1 and T2 are included to give servers explicit control over when a
   client recontacts the server about a specific IA_LL.

   In a message sent by a client to a server, the T1 and T2 fields MUST
   be set to 0.  The server MUST ignore any values in these fields in
   messages received from a client.

   In a message sent by a server to a client, the client MUST use the
   values in the T1 and T2 fields for the T1 and T2 times, unless those
   values in those fields are 0.  The values in the T1 and T2 fields are
   the number of seconds until T1 and T2.

   As per Section 7.7 of [RFC8415]), the value 0xffffffff is taken to
   mean "infinity" and should be used carefully.

   The server selects the T1 and T2 times to allow the client to extend
   the lifetimes of any address block in the IA_LL before the lifetimes
   expire, even if the server is unavailable for some short period of
   time.  Recommended values for T1 and T2 are .5 and .8 times the
   shortest valid lifetime of the address blocks in the IA that the
   server is willing to extend, respectively.  If the "shortest" valid
   lifetime is 0xffffffff ("infinity"), the recommended T1 and T2 values
   are also 0xffffffff.  If the time at which the addresses in an IA_LL
   are to be renewed is to be left to the discretion of the client, the
   server sets T1 and T2 to 0.  The client MUST follow the rules defined
   in Section 14.2 in [RFC8415].

   If a client receives an IA_LL with T1 greater than T2, and both T1
   and T2 are greater than 0, the client discards the IA_LL option and



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   processes the remainder of the message as though the server had not
   included the invalid IA_LL option.

   The IA_LL-options field typically contains one or more LLADDR options
   (see Section 10.2).  If a client does not include a LLADDR option in
   a Solicit or Request message, the server MUST treat this as a request
   for a single address and that the client has no hint as to the
   address it would like.

10.2.  Link-Layer Addresses Option

   The Link-Layer Addresses option is used to specify an address block
   associated with an IA_LL.  The option must be encapsulated in the
   IA_LL-options field of an IA_LL option.  The LLaddr-options fields
   encapsulates those options that are specific to this address block.

   The format of the Link-Layer Addresses option is:

      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_LLADDR        |          option-len           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |       link-layer-type         |        link-layer-len         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     .                                                               .
     .                     link-layer-address                        .
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                      extra-addresses                          |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                      valid-lifetime                           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     .                                                               .
     .                      LLaddr-options                           .
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                      Figure 2: LLADDR Option Format

   option-code     OPTION_LLADDR (tbd2).

   option-len      12 + link-layer-len field value + length of LLaddr-
                   options field.  Assuming a link-layer-address length
                   of 6 and no extra options, the option-len would be
                   18.





Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   link-layer-type The link-layer type MUST be a valid hardware type
                   assigned by the IANA, as described in [RFC5494] and
                   in the "Hardware Types" table at
                   https://www.iana.org/assignments/arp-parameters.  A
                   2-octet field containing an unsigned integer.

   link-layer-len  Specifies the length, in octets, of the link-layer-
                   address field (typically 6, for a link-layer-type of
                   1 (Ethernet) and 6 (IEEE 802 Networks)).  This is to
                   accommodate link-layers that may have variable-length
                   addresses.  A 2-octet field containing an unsigned
                   integer.

   link-layer-address  Specifies the address of the first link-layer
                   address that is being requested or assigned depending
                   on the message.  A client MAY send a special value to
                   request any address.  For a link-layer type of 1 and
                   6, see Section 6 for details on this field.  A link-
                   layer-len length octet field containing an address.

   extra-addresses Specifies the number of additional addresses that
                   follow the address specified in link-layer-address.
                   For a single address, 0 is used.  For example: link-
                   layer-address: 02:04:06:08:0a and extra-addresses 3
                   designates a block of 4 addresses, starting from
                   02:04:06:08:0a and ending with 02:04:06:08:0d
                   (inclusive).  A 4-octet field containing an unsigned
                   integer.

   valid-lifetime  The valid lifetime for the address(es) in the option,
                   expressed in units of seconds.  A 4-octet field
                   containing an unsigned integer.

   LLaddr-options  Any encapsulated options that are specific to this
                   particular address block.  Currently there are no
                   such options defined, but there may be in the future.

   In a message sent by a client to a server, the valid lifetime field
   MUST be set to 0.  The server MUST ignore any received value.

   In a message sent by a server to a client, the client MUST use the
   value in the valid lifetime field for the valid lifetime for the
   address block.  The value in the valid lifetime field is the number
   of seconds remaining in the lifetime.

   As per Section 7.7 of [RFC8415], the valid lifetime of 0xffffffff is
   taken to mean "infinity" and should be used carefully.




Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   More than one LLADDR option can appear in an IA_LL option.

11.  Selecting Link-Layer Addresses for Assignment to an IA_LL

   A server selects link-layer addresses to be assigned to an IA_LL
   according to the assignment policies determined by the server
   administrator and the requirements of that address space.

   Link-layer addresses are typically specific to a link and the server
   SHOULD follow the steps in Section 13.1 of [RFC8415] to determine the
   client's link.

   For IEEE 802 MAC addresses (see [IEEEStd802] as amended by
   [IEEEStd802c]):

   1.  Server administrators SHOULD follow the IEEE 802 Specifications
       with regards to the unicast address pools made available for
       assignment (see Appendix A and [IEEEStd802c]) -- only address
       space reserved for local use or with the authorization of the
       assignee may be used.

   2.  Servers MUST NOT allow administrators to configure address pools
       that would cross the 2^42 bit boundary (for 48-bit MAC addresses)
       to avoid issues with changes in the first octet of the address
       and the special bits therein (see Appendix A).  Clients MUST
       reject assignments where the assigned block would cross this
       boundary (they MUST decline the allocation - see Section 18.2.8
       of [RFC8415]).

   3.  A server MAY use options supplied by a relay agent or client to
       select the quadrant (see Appendix A) from which addresses are to
       be assigned.  This MAY include options, such as those specified
       in [I-D.ietf-dhc-slap-quadrant].

12.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to assign the OPTION_IA_LL (tbd1) option code from
   the DHCPv6 "Option Codes" registry maintained at
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6-parameters and use the
   following data when adding the option to the registry:


       Value:             tbd1
       Description:       OPTION_IA_LL
       Client ORO:        No
       Singleton Option:  No
       Reference:         this document




Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 14]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   IANA is requested to assign the OPTION_LLADDR (tbd2) option code from
   the DHCPv6 "Option Codes" registry maintained at
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6-parameters and use the
   following data when adding the option to the registry:


       Value:             tbd2
       Description:       OPTION_LLADDR
       Client ORO:        No
       Singleton Option:  No
       Reference:         this document


13.  Security Considerations

   See Section 22 of [RFC8415] and Section 23 of [RFC7227] for the DHCP
   security considerations.  See [RFC8200] for the IPv6 security
   considerations.

   As discussed in Section 22 of [RFC8415], "DHCP lacks end-to-end
   encryption between clients and servers; thus, hijacking, tampering,
   and eavesdropping attacks are all possible as a result."  In some
   network environments, it is possible to secure them as discussed
   later in that Section 22.

   There is a possibility of the same link-layer address being used by
   more than one device if not all parties on a link use this mechanism
   to obtain an address from the space assigned to the DHCP server.
   Note that this issue would exist on these networks even if DHCP were
   not used to obtain the address.

   Server implementations SHOULD consider configuration options to limit
   the maximum number of addresses to allocate (both in a single request
   and in total) to a client.  However, note that this does not prevent
   a bad client actor from pretending to be many different clients and
   consuming all available addresses.

14.  Privacy Considerations

   See Section 23 of [RFC8415] for the DHCP privacy considerations.

   For a client requesting a link-layer address directly from a server,
   as the address assigned to a client will likely be used by the client
   to communicate on the link, the address will be exposed to those able
   to listen in on this communication.  For those peers on the link that
   are able to listen in on the DHCP exchange, they would also be able
   to correlate the client's identity (based on the DUID used) with the
   assigned address.  Additional mechanisms, such as the ones described



Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 15]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   in [RFC7844] can also be used to improve anonymity by minimizing what
   is exposed.

   As discussed in Section 23 of [RFC8415], DHCP servers and hypervisors
   may need to consider the implications of assigning addresses
   sequentially.  Though in general, this is only of link-local concern
   unlike for IPv6 address assignment and prefix delegation as these may
   be used for communication over the Internet.

15.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks to the DHC Working Group participants that reviewed this
   document, provided comments, and support.  With special thanks to Ian
   Farrer for his thorough reviews and shepherding of this document
   through the IETF process.  Thanks also to area reviewers Samita
   Chakrabarti, Roni Even and Tianran Zhou, and IESG members Martin
   Duke, Benjamin Kaduk, Murray Kucherawy, Warren Kumari, Barry Leiba,
   Alvaro Retana, Eric Vyncke, and Robert Wilton for their suggestions.
   And to Roger Marks, Bob Grow, and Antonio de la Oliva for comments
   related to IEEE work and references.

16.  References

16.1.  Normative References

   [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>.

   [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>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8415]  Mrugalski, T., Siodelski, M., Volz, B., Yourtchenko, A.,
              Richardson, M., Jiang, S., Lemon, T., and T. Winters,
              "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)",
              RFC 8415, DOI 10.17487/RFC8415, November 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8415>.







Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 16]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


16.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-dhc-slap-quadrant]
              Bernardos, C. and A. Mourad, "SLAP quadrant selection
              option for DHCPv6", draft-ietf-dhc-slap-quadrant-10 (work
              in progress), August 2020.

   [IEEE-P802.1CQ-Project]
              "P802.1CQ - Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
              Networks: Multicast and Local Address Assignment",
              <https://standards.ieee.org/project/802_1CQ.html>.

   [IEEEStd802]
              "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks:
              Overview and Architecture, IEEE Std 802".

   [IEEEStd802.11]
              "IEEE Standard for Information technology -
              Telecommunications and information exchange between
              systems Local and metropolitan area networks - Specific
              requirements - Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control
              (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications, IEEE Std
              802.11".

   [IEEEStd802c]
              "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks:
              Overview and Architecture, Amendment 2: Local Medium
              Access Control (MAC) Address Usage, IEEE Std 802c-2017".

   [RFC2464]  Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet
              Networks", RFC 2464, DOI 10.17487/RFC2464, December 1998,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2464>.

   [RFC4429]  Moore, N., "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD)
              for IPv6", RFC 4429, DOI 10.17487/RFC4429, April 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4429>.

   [RFC5494]  Arkko, J. and C. Pignataro, "IANA Allocation Guidelines
              for the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP)", RFC 5494,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5494, April 2009,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5494>.

   [RFC7227]  Hankins, D., Mrugalski, T., Siodelski, M., Jiang, S., and
              S. Krishnan, "Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options",
              BCP 187, RFC 7227, DOI 10.17487/RFC7227, May 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7227>.





Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 17]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   [RFC7228]  Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for
              Constrained-Node Networks", RFC 7228,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7228, May 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7228>.

   [RFC7844]  Huitema, C., Mrugalski, T., and S. Krishnan, "Anonymity
              Profiles for DHCP Clients", RFC 7844,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7844, May 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7844>.

   [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>.

Appendix A.  IEEE 802c Summary

   This appendix provides a brief summary of IEEE 802c [IEEEStd802c].

   The original IEEE 802 specifications assigned half of the 48-bit MAC
   address space to local use -- these addresses have the U/L bit set to
   1 and are locally administered with no imposed structure.

   In 2017, the IEEE issued the IEEE Std 802c specification which
   defines a new optional "Structured Local Address Plan (SLAP) that
   specifies different assignment approaches in four specified regions
   of the local MAC address space."  Under this plan, there are 4 SLAP
   quadrants that use different assignment policies.

   The first octet of the MAC address Z and Y bits define the quadrant
   for locally assigned addresses (X-bit is 1).  In IEEE representation,
   these bits are as follows:

       LSB                MSB
       M  X  Y  Z  -  -  -  -
       |  |  |  |
       |  |  |  +------------ SLAP Z-bit
       |  |  +--------------- SLAP Y-bit
       |  +------------------ X-bit (U/L) = 1 for locally assigned
       +--------------------- M-bit (I/G) (unicast/group)

                            Figure 3: SLAP Bits

   The SLAP quadrants are:







Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 18]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   +----------+-------+-------+-----------------------+----------------+
   | Quadrant | Y-bit | Z-bit | Local Identifier Type | Local          |
   |          |       |       |                       | Identifier     |
   +----------+-------+-------+-----------------------+----------------+
   |       01 | 0     | 1     | Extended Local        | ELI            |
   |       11 | 1     | 1     | Standard Assigned     | SAI            |
   |       00 | 0     | 0     | Administratively      | AAI            |
   |          |       |       | Assigned              |                |
   |       10 | 1     | 0     | Reserved              | Reserved       |
   +----------+-------+-------+-----------------------+----------------+

                              SLAP Quadrants

   Extended Local Identifier (ELI) derived MAC addresses are based on an
   assigned Company ID (CID), which is 24-bits (including the M, X, Y,
   and Z bits) for 48-bit MAC addresses.  This leaves 24-bits for the
   locally assigned address for each CID for unicast (M-bit = 0) and
   also for multicast (M-bit = 1).  The CID is assigned by the IEEE RA.

   Standard Assigned Identifier (SAI) derived MAC addresses are assigned
   by a protocol specified in an IEEE 802 standard.  For 48-bit MAC
   addresses, 44 bits are available.  Multiple protocols for assigning
   SAIs may be specified in IEEE standards.  Coexistence of multiple
   protocols may be supported by limiting the subspace available for
   assignment by each protocol.

   Administratively Assigned Identifier (AAI) derived MAC addresses are
   assigned locally.  Administrators manage the space as needed.  Note
   that multicast IPv6 packets ([RFC2464]) use a destination address
   starting in 33-33, so AAI addresses in that range should not be
   assigned.  For 48-bit MAC addresses, 44 bits are available.

   The last quadrant is reserved for future use.  While this quadrant
   may also be used similar to AAI space, administrators should be aware
   that future specifications may define alternate uses that could be
   incompatible.

Authors' Addresses

   Bernie Volz
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   1414 Massachusetts Ave
   Boxborough, MA 01719
   USA

   Email: volz@cisco.com





Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 19]


Internet-Draft    DHCPv6 Link-Layer Address Assignment    September 2020


   Tomek Mrugalski
   Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
   950 Charter Street
   Redwood City, CA  94063
   USA

   Email: tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com


   Carlos J. Bernardos
   Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
   Av. Universidad, 30
   Leganes, Madrid  28911
   Spain

   Phone: +34 91624 6236
   Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es
   URI:   http://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/

































Volz, et al.              Expires March 7, 2021                [Page 20]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/