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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08

6man Working Group                                           S. Krishnan
Internet-Draft                                               A. Kavanagh
Intended status: Standards Track                                Ericsson
Expires: January 14, 2010                                       S. Ooghe
                                                          Alcatel-Lucent
                                                                B. Varga
                                                          Magyar Telekom
                                                           July 13, 2009


        Line identification in IPv6 Router Solicitation messages
                     draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-03

Status of this Memo

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

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

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

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

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

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2010.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
   publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.





Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


Abstract

   In ethernet and PON based aggregation networks, several subscriber
   premises may be connected to the same interface of an edge router.
   This document proposes a method for the edge router to identify the
   subscriber premises using the contents of the received router
   solicitation messages.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.1.  Conventions used in this document  . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Issues with identifying the subscriber in an n:1 vlan model  .  4
   3.  Access Node Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     3.1.  On receiving a router solicitation from the subscriber . .  5
     3.2.  On receiving a router advertisement from the edge
           router . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Edge Router Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.1.  On receiving a router solicitation from the subscriber . .  6
     4.2.  On sending a router advertisement towards the
           subscriber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   5.  Line Identification Neighbor Discovery Option  . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  Interactions with SEND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     6.1.  Edge Router Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       6.1.1.  On receiving a router solicitation from the
               subscriber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       6.1.2.  On sending a router advertisement towards the
               subscriber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     6.2.  Access Node Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   7.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   8.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   9.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
















Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


1.  Introduction

   DSL is a widely deployed access technology for Broadband Access for
   Next Generation Networks.  While traditionally DSL access networks
   were PPP based some networks are migrating from the traditional PPP
   access model into a pure IP-based ethernet aggregated access
   environment.Architectural and topological models of an Ethernet
   aggregation network in context of DSL aggregation are described in
   [TR101].  One of the ethernet and PON aggregation models specified in
   this document bridges sessions from multiple subscribers behind a DSL
   Access Node (AN), also referred to as a DSLAM, into a single VLAN in
   the aggregation network.  This is called the N:1 VLAN allocation
   model.


   +---+   +----+    +----------+
   |CPE|---| RG |----|          |
   +---+   +----+    |          |
                     |    AN    |\
   +---+   +----+    |          | \
   |CPE|---| RG |----|          |  \
   +---+   +----+    +----------+   \                    +----------+
                                     \                   |          |
                                   +-------------+       |          |
                                   | Aggregation |       |  Edge    |
                                   |    Node     |-------|  Router  |
                                   +-------------+       |          |
                                     /                   |          |
                     +----------+   /                    +----------+
                     |          |  /
   +---+   +----+    |          | /
   |CPE|---| RG |----|    AN    |/
   +---+   +----+    |          |
                     |          |
                     +----------+


              Figure 1: Broadband Forum Network Architecture

1.1.  Conventions used in this document

   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].







Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


2.  Issues with identifying the subscriber in an n:1 vlan model

   In a fixed Broadband Network, IPv6 hosts are connected to an Access
   Node (AN).  These hosts today will typically send a Route
   Solicitation Message to the Edge Router, to which the Edge Router
   responds with a Router Advertisement message.  The router
   advertisement typically contains a prefix that the host will use to
   automatically configure an IPv6 Address.  Upon sending the Route
   Solicitation message the node connecting the host on the access
   circuit, typically an Access Node (AN), would forward the RS to the
   Edge Router upstream over a switched network.  However, in such
   ethernet based aggregation networks, several subscriber premises may
   be connected to the same interface of an edge router (e.g. on the
   same VLAN).  However, the edge router requires some information to
   identify the host on the circuit line the host is connected on.  To
   accomplish this, the AN needs to add line identification information
   to the Route Solicitation message and forward this to the Edge
   Router.  This document proposes a method for the edge router to
   identify the subscriber premises using the contents of the received
   router solicitation messages.































Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


3.  Access Node Behavior

3.1.  On receiving a router solicitation from the subscriber

   When a host sends out a router solicitation, it is received by the
   access node.  First, the access node needs to verify if there are no
   LIO options present in the router solicitation.  If there are any LIO
   options present, the AN MUST drop the router solicitation.  If there
   are no LIO options present, the AN SHOULD insert a new LIO option
   into the router solicitation message.  The AN MUST set the line
   identification data of the LIO option to contain the subscriber agent
   circuit identifier corresponding to the logical access loop port of
   the Access Node from which the RS was initiated.  After inserting the
   LIO, the AN MUST recalculate the ICMPv6 checksum of the RS packet.

3.2.  On receiving a router advertisement from the edge router

   When the edge router sends out a router advertisement in response to
   the RS, it is received by the access node.  If there is an LIO option
   present, the AN MUST use the line identification data of the LIO
   option to identify the subscriber agent circuit identifier
   corresponding to the logical access loop port of the Access Node on
   which the RA should be sent.  If the LIO option was present in the
   received RA, the AN MUST remove the option before forwarding the RA
   to the subscriber premise.  After removing the LIO, the AN MUST
   recalculate the ICMPv6 checksum of the RS packet.

























Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


4.  Edge Router Behavior

4.1.  On receiving a router solicitation from the subscriber

   When the edge router receives a router solicitation forwarded by the
   access node, it needs to check if there is an LIO option present in
   the router solicitation.  If an LIO option is present, the edge
   router MAY use the contents of the line identification field to
   lookup the addressing information and policy that need to be applied
   to the subscriber.

4.2.  On sending a router advertisement towards the subscriber

   When the edge router sends out a router advertisement in response to
   an RS that contained an LIO option, it MUST unicast the RA back to
   the sender of the RS.Whenever the edge router needs to send out a
   multicast router advertisement message (e.g. because the unicast MAC
   address has aged out in the Neighbor Cache), it SHOULD insert an LIO
   option in the RA.  If the LIO option is included, the line
   identification data field of the LIO option MUST be set to the same
   value as was received in the LIO option of the RS.






























Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


5.  Line Identification Neighbor Discovery Option

   The Line Identification Option (LIO) can be included in Router
   Solicitation and Router Advertisement messages.  Multiple Line
   Identification options MUST NOT be present in a Neighbor Discovery
   message.  The LIO has an alignment requirement of 4n.

        0                   1                   2                   3
        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |     Type      |   Length      |           Reserved            |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                     Line Identification...
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                Figure 2: Line Identification Option Layout


    Type

       8-bit identifier of the type of option. The option identifier
       for the line identification option will be allocated by the IANA.

    Length

       8-bit unsigned integer.  The length of the option (including
       the type and length fields) in units of 8 octets.  The value
       0 is considered invalid.

    Line Identification

       In a Router Solicitation:

       Variable length data inserted by the Access Node describing the
       subscriber agent circuit identifier corresponding to the logical
       access loop port of the Access Node from which the RS was
       initiated.

       In a Router Advertisement:

       Variable length data inserted by the Edge Router describing the
       subscriber agent circuit identifier corresponding to the logical
       access loop port of the Access Node on which the RA needs to be
       sent out.







Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


6.  Interactions with SEND

   The LIO is compatible with SEND but it cannot be protected by SEND.
   Since the LIO option is inserted into the neighbor discovery message
   without the knowledge of the sender, it cannot be included in the
   SEND verification process.

6.1.  Edge Router Behavior

6.1.1.  On receiving a router solicitation from the subscriber

   The edge router MUST first verify the ICMPv6 checksum of the router
   solicitation packet with the LIO option present.  If the checksum is
   verified to be valid, the LIO option MUST be removed from the packet
   and the ICMPv6 checksum MUST be recalculated, before proceeding with
   the SEND verification.

6.1.2.  On sending a router advertisement towards the subscriber

   When the edge router needs to send out a SEND protected router
   advertisement with the LIO option included, it MUST first create the
   RA message without the LIO option included.  It MUST calculate the
   ICMPv6 checksum on this message and then append the RSA signature
   option as the last option in this message.  This signature will also
   protect the ICMPv6 checksum of the RA message.  It MUST then add the
   LIO option after the RSA signature option and then recalculate the
   ICMPv6 checksum to include the LIO.

6.2.  Access Node Behavior

   The access node does not need to perform any specific operations in
   order to support SEND protected messages



















Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


7.  Acknowledgements

   The author would like to thank Margaret Wasserman, Mark Townsley,
   David Miles, John Kaippallimalil, and Eric Levy-Abegnoli for
   reviewing this document and suggesting changes.














































Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


8.  Security Considerations

   The line identification information inserted by the access node or
   the edge router is not protected.  This means that this option may be
   modifed, inserted, or deleted without being detected.  In order to
   ensure validity of the contents of the line identification field, the
   network between the access node and the edge router needs to be
   trusted.











































Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


9.  IANA Considerations

   This document defines a new IPv6 neighbor discovery option for
   carrying line identification.  IANA is requested to assign a new
   neighbor discovery option type in the registry maintained at

   http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters

   <TBA> Line Identification Option [RFCXXXX]










































Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


10.  Normative References

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

   [RFC3971]  Arkko, J., Kempf, J., Zill, B., and P. Nikander, "SEcure
              Neighbor Discovery (SEND)", RFC 3971, March 2005.

   [TR101]    Broadband Forum, "Migration to Ethernet-based DSL
              aggregation", <http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/
              download/TR-101.pdf>.








































Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft          Line Identification in RS              July 2009


Authors' Addresses

   Suresh Krishnan
   Ericsson
   8400 Blvd Decarie
   Town of Mount Royal, Quebec
   Canada

   Email: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com


   Alan Kavanagh
   Ericsson
   8400 Blvd Decarie
   Town of Mount Royal, Quebec
   Canada

   Email: alan.kavanagh@ericsson.com


   Sven Ooghe
   Alcatel-Lucent
   Copernicuslaan 50
   2018 Antwerp,
   Belgium

   Phone:
   Email: sven.ooghe@alcatel-lucent.com


   Balazs Varga
   Magyar Telekom

   Email: varga.balazs@telekom.hu

















Krishnan, et al.        Expires January 14, 2010               [Page 13]


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