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

Versions: (draft-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis) 00 01 draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis

Internet Engineering Task Force                                 H. Singh
Internet-Draft                                                 W. Beebee
Intended status: Informational                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: January 12, 2012                                      C. Donley
                                                               CableLabs
                                                                B. Stark
                                                                     ATT
                                                           O. Troan, Ed.
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                           July 11, 2011


          Advanced Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers
                draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis-01

Abstract

   This document continues the work undertaken by the IPv6 CE Router
   Phase I work in the IETF v6ops Working Group.  Advanced requirements
   or Phase II work is covered in this document.

Status of this Memo

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

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 12, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (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



Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.1.  Requirements Language  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Conceptual Configuration Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   5.  Advanced Features and Feature Requirements . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.1.  DNS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.2.  Multicast Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.3.  Routed network behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     5.4.  Transition Technologies Support  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       5.4.1.  Dual-Stack(DS)-Lite  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       5.4.2.  6rd  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       5.4.3.  Transition Technologies Coexistence  . . . . . . . . .  9
     5.5.  Quality Of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     5.6.  Unicast Data Forwarding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     5.7.  Additional DHCPv6 WAN Requirement  . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   7.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   8.  Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   9.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14



















Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


1.  Introduction

   This document defines Advanced IPv6 features for a residential or
   small office router referred to as an IPv6 CE router.  Typically
   these routers also support IPv4.  The IPv6 End-user Network
   Architecture for such a router is described in [RFC6204].  This
   version of the document includes the requirements for Advanced
   features.

1.1.  Requirements Language

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].


2.  Terminology

   End-user Network          one or more links attached to the IPv6 CE
                             router that connect IPv6 hosts.

   IPv6 Customer Edge router a node intended for home or small office
                             use which forwards IPv6 packets not
                             explicitly addressed to itself.  The IPv6
                             CE router connects the end-user network to
                             a service provider network.

   IPv6 host                 any device implementing an IPv6 stack
                             receiving IPv6 connectivity through the
                             IPv6 CE router

   LAN interface             an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link in
                             the end-user network.  Examples are
                             Ethernets (simple or bridged), 802.11
                             wireless or other LAN technologies.  An
                             IPv6 CE router may have one or more network
                             layer LAN Interfaces.

   Service Provider          an entity that provides access to the
                             Internet.  In this document, a Service
                             Provider specifically offers Internet
                             access using IPv6, and may also offer IPv4
                             Internet access.  The Service Provider can
                             provide such access over a variety of
                             different transport methods such as DSL,
                             cable, wireless, and others.





Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   WAN interface             an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link
                             used to provide connectivity to the Service
                             Provider network; example link technologies
                             include Ethernets (simple or bridged), PPP
                             links, Frame Relay, or ATM networks as well
                             as Internet-layer (or higher-layer)
                             "tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or
                             IPv6 itself.


3.  Conceptual Configuration Variables

   The CE Router maintains such a list of conceptual optional
   configuration variables.

   1.  Enable an IGP on the LAN.

   2.  Configure 6rd configuration.

   3.  Configure IPv6 for 6rd to have IPv6 traffic go to the 6rd Border
       Relay vs. directly to peers.


4.  Architecture

   This document extends the architecture described in [RFC6204] to
   cover a strictly larger set of operational scenarios.  In particular,
   QoS, multicast, DNS, routed network in the home, transition
   technologies, and conceptual configuration variables.  This document
   also extends the model described in [RFC6204] to a two router
   topology where the two routers are connected back-to-back (the LAN of
   one router is connected to the WAN of the other router).  This
   topology is depicted below:


















Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


                        +-------+-------+                   \
                        |   Service     |                    \
                        |   Provider    |                     | Service
                        |    Router     |                     | Provider
                        +-------+-------+                     | network
                                |                             /
                                | Customer                   /
                                | Internet connection       /
                                |
                         +------+--------+                  \
                         |     IPv6      |                   \
                         | Customer Edge |                    \
                         |    Router     |                    |
                         +----+-+-----+--+                    |
             Network A        | |     |   Network B           |
       ----+-------------+----+ |   --+--+-------------+---   |
           |             |    | |        |             |      |
      +----+-----+ +-----+----+ |   +----+-----+ +-----+----+ |
      |IPv6 Host | |IPv6 Host | |   | IPv6 Host| |IPv6 Host | |
      |          | |          | |   |          | |          | |
      +----------+ +-----+----+ |   +----------+ +----------+ |
                                |                             |
                         +------+--------+                    | End-User
                         |     IPv6      |                    | networks
                         |   Interior    |                    |
                         |    Router     |                    |
                         +---+-------+-+-+                    |
             Network C       |       |   Network D            |
       ----+-------------+---+-    --+---+-------------+---   |
           |             |               |             |      |
      +----+-----+ +-----+----+     +----+-----+ +-----+----+ |
      |IPv6 Host | |IPv6 Host |     | IPv6 Host| |IPv6 Host | |
      |          | |          |     |          | |          | /
      +----------+ +-----+----+     +----------+ +----------+/


                                 Figure 1.

   For DNS, the operational expectation is that the end-user would be
   able to access home hosts from the home using DNS names instead of
   more cumbersome IPv6 addresses.  Note that this is distinct from the
   requirement to access home hosts from outside the home.

   End-users are expected to be able to receive multicast video in the
   home without requiring the CE router to include the cost of
   supporting full multicast routing protocols.





Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


5.  Advanced Features and Feature Requirements

   The IPv6 CE router will need to support connectivity to one or more
   access network architectures.  This document describes an IPv6 CE
   router that is not specific to any particular architecture or Service
   Provider, and supports all commonly used architectures.

5.1.  DNS

   D-1:  The CE Router MAY include a DNS server authoritative for .local
         to handle local queries.  If the service provider specifies one
         or more DNS resolvers in DHCP configuration options, the CE
         router SHOULD forward all non-local DNS queries unchanged to
         those servers.  The CE Router MAY also include DNS64
         functionality which is specified in [RFC6147].

5.2.  Multicast Behavior

   This section is only applicable to a CE Router with at least one LAN
   interface.  A host in the home is expected to receive multicast
   video.  Note the CE Router resides at edge of the home and the
   Service Provider, and the CE Router has at least one WAN connection
   for multiple LAN connections.  In such a multiple LAN to a WAN
   toplogy at the CE Router edge, it is not necessary to run a multicast
   routing protocol and thus MLD Proxy as specified in [RFC4605] can be
   used.  The CE Router discovers the hosts via a MLDv2 Router
   implementation on a LAN interface.  A WAN interface of the CE Router
   interacts with the Service Provider router by sending MLD Reports and
   replying to MLD queries for multicast Group memberships for hosts in
   the home.

   The CE router SHOULD implement MLD Proxy as specified in [RFC4605].
   For the routed topology shown in Figure 1, each router implements a
   MLD Proxy.  If the CE router implements MLD Proxy, the requirements
   on the CE Router for MLD Proxy are listed below.

   WAN requirements, MLD Proxy:

   WMLD-1:  Consistent with [RFC4605], the CE router MUST NOT implement
            the router portion of MLDv2 for the WAN interface.

   LAN requirements, MLD Proxy:

   LMMLD-1:  The CPE Router MUST follow the model described for MLD
             Proxy in [RFC4605] to implement multicast.






Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   LMMLD-2:  Consistent with [RFC4605], the LAN interfaces on the CPE
             router MUST NOT implement an MLDv2 Multicast Listener.

   LAN requirements:

   LM-1:  If the CE Router has bridging configured between the LAN
          interfaces, then the LAN interfaces MUST support snooping of
          MLD [RFC3810] messages as per [RFC4541] .

5.3.  Routed network behavior

   CPE Router Behavior in a routed network:

   R-1:  One example of the CPE Router use in the home is shown below.
         The home has a broadband modem combined with a CPE Router, all
         in one device.  The LAN interface of the device is connected to
         another standalone CPE Router that supports a wireless access
         point.  To support such a network, this document recommends
         using prefix delegation of the prefix obtained either via IA_PD
         from WAN interface or a ULA from the LAN interface.  The
         network interface of the downstream router MAY obtain an IA_PD
         via stateful DHCPv6.  If the CPE router supports the routed
         network through a vendor specific automatic prefix delegation,
         the CPE router MUST support a DHCPv6 server or DHCPv6 relay
         agent.  Further, if an IA_PD is used, the Service Provider or
         user MUST allocate an IA_PD or ULA prefix short enough to be
         delegated and subsequently used for SLAAC.  Therefore, a prefix
         length shorter than /64 is needed.  The CPE Router MAY support
         and IGP in the home network.


                /-------+------------\    /------------+-----\
        SP <--+ Modem | CPE Router    +--+ CPE Router | WAP + --> PC
                \-------+------------/    \------------+-----/

        WAP = Wireless Access Point




                                    Figure 2.

5.4.  Transition Technologies Support

5.4.1.  Dual-Stack(DS)-Lite

   Even as users migrate from IPv4 to IPv6 addressing, a significant
   percentage of Internet resources and content will remain accessible



Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   only through IPv4.  Also, many end-user devices will only support
   IPv4.  As a consequence, Service Providers require mechanisms to
   allow customers to continue to access content and resources using
   IPv4 even after the last IPv4 allocations have been fully depleted.
   One technology that can be used for IPv4 address extension is DS-
   Lite.

   DS-Lite enables a Service Provider to share IPv4 addresses among
   multiple customers by combining two well-known technologies: IP in IP
   (IPv4-in-IPv6) tunneling and Carrier Grade NAT.  More specifically,
   Dual-Stack-Lite encapsulates IPv4 traffic inside an IPv6 tunnel at
   the IPv6 CE Router and sends it to a Service Provider Address Family
   Translation Router (AFTR).  Configuration of the IPv6 CE Router to
   support IPv4 LAN traffic is outside the scope of this document.

   The IPv6 CE Router SHOULD implement DS-Lite functionality as
   specified in [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite].

   WAN requirements:

   DLW-1:  To facilitate IPv4 extension over an IPv6 network, if the CE
           Router supports DS-Lite functionality, the CE Router WAN
           interface MUST implement a B4 Interface as specified in
           [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite].

   DLW-2:  If the IPv6 CE Router implements DS-Lite functionality, the
           CE Router MUST support using a DS-Lite DHCPv6 option
           [I-D.ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option] to configure the
           DS-Lite tunnel.  The IPv6 CE Router MAY use other mechanisms
           to configure DS-Lite parameters.  Such mechanisms are outside
           the scope of this document.

   DLW-3:  IPv6 CE Router MUST NOT perform IPv4 Network Address
           Translation (NAT) on IPv4 traffic encapsulated using DS-Lite.

   DLW-4:  If the IPv6 CE Router is configured with a public IPv4
           address on its WAN interface, where public IPv4 address is
           defined as any address which is not in the private IP address
           space specified in [RFC1918] and also not in the reserved IP
           address space specified in
           [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite], then the IPv6 CE Router
           MUST disable the DS-Lite B4 element.

   DLW-5:  If DS-Lite is operational on the IPv6 CE Router, multicast
           data MUST NOT be sent on any DS-Lite tunnel.






Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


5.4.2.  6rd

   The IPv6 CE Router can be used to offer IPv6 service to a LAN, even
   when the WAN access network only supports IPv4.  One technology that
   supports IPv6 service over an IPv4 network is IPv6 Rapid Deployment
   (6rd). 6rd encapsulates IPv6 traffic from the end user LAN inside
   IPv4 at the IPv6 CE Router and sends it to a Service Provider Border
   Relay (BR).  The IPv6 CE Router calculates a 6rd delegated IPv6
   prefix during 6rd configuration, and sub-delegates the 6rd delegated
   prefix to devices in the LAN.

   The IPv6 CE Router SHOULD implement 6rd functionality as specified in
   [RFC5969].

   6rd requirements:

   6RD-1:  If the IPv6 CE Router implements 6rd functionality, the CE
           Router WAN interface MUST support at least one 6rd Virtual
           Interface and 6rd CE functionality as specified in [RFC5969].

   6RD-2:  If the IPv6 CE Router implements 6rd CE functionality, it
           MUST support user-entered configuration and using the 6rd
           DHCPv4 Option (212) for 6rd configuration.  The IPv6 CE
           Router MAY use other mechanisms to configure 6rd parameters.
           Such mechanisms are outside the scope of this document.

   6RD-3:  If the CE router implements 6rd functionality, it MUST allow
           the user to specify whether all IPv6 traffic goes to the 6rd
           Border Relay, or whether other destinations within the same
           6rd domain are routed directly to those destinations.  The CE
           router MAY use other mechanisms to configure this.  Such
           mechanisms are outside the scope of this document.

   6RD-4:  If 6rd is operational on the IPv6 CE Router, multicast data
           MUST NOT be sent on any 6rd tunnel.

5.4.3.  Transition Technologies Coexistence

   Run the following four in parallel to provision CPE router
   connectivity to the Service Provider:

   1.  Initiate IPv4 address acquisition.

   2.  Initiate IPv6 address acquisition as specified by [RFC6204].

   3.  If 6rd is provisioned, initiate 6rd.





Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   4.  If DS-Lite is provisioned, initiate DS-Lite.

   The default route for IPv6 through the native physical interface
   should have preference over the 6rd tunnel interface.  The default
   route for IPv4 through the native physical interface should have
   preference over the DS-Lite tunnel interface.

5.5.  Quality Of Service

   Q-1:  The CPE router MAY support differentiated services [RFC2474].

5.6.  Unicast Data Forwarding

   The null route introduced by the WPD-6 requirement in [RFC6204] has
   lower precedence than other routes except for the default route.

5.7.  Additional DHCPv6 WAN Requirement

   When the WAN interface sends a DHCPV6 SOLICIT message, the CE router
   SHOULD request all mandatory information (IA_NA and IA_PD options) in
   the SOLICIT regardless of whether any partial information was
   received in response to previous SOLICITs.


6.  Security Considerations

   None.


7.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks to the following people (in alphabetical order) for their
   guidance and feedback:

   Mikael Abrahamsson, Merete Asak, Scott Beuker, Mohamed Boucadair, Rex
   Bullinger, Brian Carpenter, Remi Denis-Courmont, Gert Doering, Alain
   Durand, Katsunori Fukuoka, Tony Hain, Thomas Herbst, Kevin Johns,
   Stephen Kramer, Victor Kuarsingh, Francois-Xavier Le Bail, Chad
   Mikkelson, David Miles, Shin Miyakawa, Jean-Francois Mule, Michael
   Newbery, Carlos Pignataro, John Pomeroy, Antonio Querubin, Teemu
   Savolainen, Matt Schmitt, Hiroki Sato, Mark Townsley, Bernie Volz,
   James Woodyatt, Dan Wing and Cor Zwart

   This draft is based in part on CableLabs' eRouter specification.  The
   authors wish to acknowledge the additional contributors from the
   eRouter team:

   Ben Bekele, Amol Bhagwat, Ralph Brown, Eduardo Cardona, Margo Dolas,



Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   Toerless Eckert, Doc Evans, Roger Fish, Michelle Kuska, Diego
   Mazzola, John McQueen, Harsh Parandekar, Michael Patrick, Saifur
   Rahman, Lakshmi Raman, Ryan Ross, Ron da Silva, Madhu Sudan, Dan
   Torbet and Greg White.


8.  Contributors

   The following people have participated as co-authors or provided
   substantial contributions to this document: Ralph Droms, Kirk
   Erichsen, Fred Baker, Jason Weil, Lee Howard, Jean-Francois Tremblay,
   Yiu Lee, John Jason Brzozowski and Heather Kirksey.


9.  IANA Considerations

   This memo includes no request to IANA.


10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option]
              Hankins, D. and T. Mrugalski, "Dynamic Host Configuration
              Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Option for Dual- Stack Lite",
              draft-ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option-10 (work in
              progress), March 2011.

   [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite]
              Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
              Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4
              Exhaustion", draft-ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite-11 (work
              in progress), May 2011.

   [I-D.vyncke-advanced-ipv6-security]
              Vyncke, E. and M. Townsley, "Advanced Security for IPv6
              CPE", draft-vyncke-advanced-ipv6-security-01 (work in
              progress), March 2010.

   [RFC1122]  Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -
              Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, October 1989.

   [RFC1918]  Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
              E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
              BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.

   [RFC2080]  Malkin, G. and R. Minnear, "RIPng for IPv6", RFC 2080,



Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


              January 1997.

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

   [RFC2464]  Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet
              Networks", RFC 2464, December 1998.

   [RFC2474]  Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., and D. Black,
              "Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS
              Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474,
              December 1998.

   [RFC2827]  Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering:
              Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source
              Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000.

   [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.

   [RFC3736]  Droms, R., "Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
              (DHCP) Service for IPv6", RFC 3736, April 2004.

   [RFC3810]  Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery
              Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004.

   [RFC4075]  Kalusivalingam, V., "Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP)
              Configuration Option for DHCPv6", RFC 4075, May 2005.

   [RFC4193]  Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast
              Addresses", RFC 4193, October 2005.

   [RFC4242]  Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, "Information Refresh
              Time Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
              IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 4242, November 2005.

   [RFC4294]  Loughney, J., "IPv6 Node Requirements", RFC 4294,
              April 2006.




Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   [RFC4443]  Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, "Internet Control
              Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol
              Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 4443, March 2006.

   [RFC4541]  Christensen, M., Kimball, K., and F. Solensky,
              "Considerations for Internet Group Management Protocol
              (IGMP) and Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) Snooping
              Switches", RFC 4541, May 2006.

   [RFC4605]  Fenner, B., He, H., Haberman, B., and H. Sandick,
              "Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) / Multicast
              Listener Discovery (MLD)-Based Multicast Forwarding
              ("IGMP/MLD Proxying")", RFC 4605, August 2006.

   [RFC4632]  Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing
              (CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation
              Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, August 2006.

   [RFC4779]  Asadullah, S., Ahmed, A., Popoviciu, C., Savola, P., and
              J. Palet, "ISP IPv6 Deployment Scenarios in Broadband
              Access Networks", RFC 4779, January 2007.

   [RFC4861]  Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
              "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
              September 2007.

   [RFC4862]  Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
              Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.

   [RFC4864]  Van de Velde, G., Hain, T., Droms, R., Carpenter, B., and
              E. Klein, "Local Network Protection for IPv6", RFC 4864,
              May 2007.

   [RFC5072]  S.Varada, Haskins, D., and E. Allen, "IP Version 6 over
              PPP", RFC 5072, September 2007.

   [RFC5571]  Storer, B., Pignataro, C., Dos Santos, M., Stevant, B.,
              Toutain, L., and J. Tremblay, "Softwire Hub and Spoke
              Deployment Framework with Layer Two Tunneling Protocol
              Version 2 (L2TPv2)", RFC 5571, June 2009.

   [RFC5942]  Singh, H., Beebee, W., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6 Subnet
              Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet
              Prefixes", RFC 5942, July 2010.

   [RFC5969]  Townsley, W. and O. Troan, "IPv6 Rapid Deployment on IPv4
              Infrastructures (6rd) -- Protocol Specification",
              RFC 5969, August 2010.



Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   [RFC6147]  Bagnulo, M., Sullivan, A., Matthews, P., and I. van
              Beijnum, "DNS64: DNS Extensions for Network Address
              Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6147,
              April 2011.

   [RFC6204]  Singh, H., Beebee, W., Donley, C., Stark, B., and O.
              Troan, "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge
              Routers", RFC 6204, April 2011.

10.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-behave-v6v4-framework]
              Baker, F., Li, X., Bao, C., and K. Yin, "Framework for
              IPv4/IPv6 Translation",
              draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-framework-10 (work in progress),
              August 2010.

   [UPnP-IGD]
              UPnP Forum, "Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) Internet
              Gateway Device (IGD)", November 2001,
              <http://www.upnp.org/standardizeddcps/igd.asp>.


Authors' Addresses

   Hemant Singh
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   1414 Massachusetts Ave.
   Boxborough, MA  01719
   USA

   Phone: +1 978 936 1622
   Email: shemant@cisco.com
   URI:   http://www.cisco.com/


   Wes Beebee
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   1414 Massachusetts Ave.
   Boxborough, MA  01719
   USA

   Phone: +1 978 936 2030
   Email: wbeebee@cisco.com
   URI:   http://www.cisco.com/






Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft    IPv6 CE router Advanced Requirements         July 2011


   Chris Donley
   CableLabs
   858 Coal Creek Circle
   Louisville, CO  80027
   USA

   Email: c.donley@cablelabs.com


   Barbara Stark
   ATT
   725 W Peachtree St
   Atlanta, GA  30308
   USA

   Email: barbara.stark@att.com


   Ole Troan (editor)
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Veversmauet 8
   N-5017 BERGEN,
   Norway

   Email: ot@cisco.com


























Singh, et al.           Expires January 12, 2012               [Page 15]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.114, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/