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

Versions: 00 01

Network Working Group                                      M. Kuehlewind
Internet-Draft                                                 Z. Sarker
Intended status: Informational                                  Ericsson
Expires: July 30, 2020                                  January 27, 2020


   Discovery Mechanism for QUIC-based, Non-transparent Proxy Services
                draft-kuehlewind-quic-proxy-discovery-01

Abstract

   Often an intermediate instance (such as a proxy server) is used to
   connect to a web server or a communicating peer if a direct end-to-
   end IP connectivity is not possible or the proxy can provide a
   support service like, e.g., address anonymisation.  To use a non-
   transparent proxy a client explicitly connects to it and requests
   forwarding to the final target server.  The client either knows the
   proxy address as preconfigured in the application or can dynamically
   learn about available proxy services.  This document describes
   different discovery mechanisms for non-transparent proxies that are
   either located in the local network, e.g. home or enterprise network,
   in the access network, or somewhere else on the Internet usually
   close to the target server or even in the same network as the target
   server.

   This document assumes that the non-transparent proxy server is
   connected via QUIC and discusses potential discovery mechanisms for
   such a QUIC-based, non-transparent proxy.

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 July 30, 2020.






Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


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
   (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.  Using DHCP for Local Discovery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Using IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for Local Discovery . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Using PVDs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  DNS Service Discovery (DNS-SD)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.1.  Local discovery using mDNS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Discovery for Remote Domains  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Using PCP options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Using Anycast address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  Security Consideration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12

1.  Introduction

   QUIC is a new transport protocol that was initially developed as a
   way to optimize HTTP traffic by supporting multiplexing without head-
   of-line-blocking and integrating security directly into the
   transport.  This tight integration of security allows the transport
   and security handshakes to be combined into a single round-trip
   exchange, after which both the transport connection and authenticated
   encryption keys are ready.

   Often an intermediate instance (such as a proxy server) is used to
   connect to a web server or a communicating peer if a direct end-to-
   end IP connectivity is not possible or the proxy can provide a



Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


   support service like, e.g., address anonymization.  QUIC's ability to
   multiplex, encrypt data, and migrate between network paths makes it
   ideal for solutions that need to tunnel or proxy traffic.

   Existing proxies that are based on TCP and HTTP are often
   transparent.  That is, they do not require the cooperation of the
   ultimate connection endpoints, and are often not visible to one or
   both of the endpoints.  If QUIC provides the basis for future
   tunneling and proxying solutions, it is expected that this
   relationship will change.  At least one of the endpoints will be
   aware of the proxy, explicitly connect to it, and coordinate with it.
   This makes the proxy and tunneling non-transparent to at least most
   often the client.  This allows client hosts to make explicit
   decisions about the services they request from proxies (for example,
   simple forwarding or more advance performance-optimizing services),
   and to do so using a secure communication channel between itself and
   the proxy.  [I-D.kuehlewind-quic-substrate] describes some of the use
   cases for using QUIC for proxying and tunneling.

   To use a non-transparent proxy service, a client explicitly connects
   to it and requests forwarding to the final target server.  The client
   either knows the proxy address as preconfigured in the application or
   can dynamically learn about available proxy servers.  This document
   describes different discovery mechanisms for proxies that are either
   located in the local network, e.g. home or enterprise network, in the
   access network, or somewhere else on the Internet usually close to
   the target server or even in the same network as the target server.
   For the rest of the document the work "proxy" refers to a non-
   transparent proxy.

   The discovery mechanisms proposed in this document cover a range of
   approaches based on IETF protocols and commonly used mechanisms,
   however, other mechanisms in more specialized networks are possible
   as well.  For 5G networks, the 3GPP specifies an extended exposure
   framework that potentially can also be used for proxy discovery and
   routing support.

   After discovery a client can connect to the proxy and request a proxy
   service, e.g. using the MASQUE protocol [I-D.schinazi-masque], to
   instruct the proxy forward traffic to a target server as well as
   negotiate and request proxy capabilities and parameters.

2.  Using DHCP for Local Discovery

   DHCP [RFC2131] can be used to announce the IP address of local proxy
   server in IPv4 networks, as well DHCPv6 [RFC8415] in IPv6 networks.
   New options for both protocols are specified below and as shown in
   Figure 1 and Figure 2.  In both cases the option can contain one or



Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


   more IP addresses (but of course IPV4 and IOv6 address respectively)
   of QUIC-based proxy servers (indicated by the Q flag).  All of the
   addresses in one option share the same Lifetime value.  If it is
   desirable to have different Lifetime values, multiple options can be
   used.

                       0                             1
                 0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5
                +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
                |          Code         |          Len          |
                +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
                |                   Reserved                 |Q |
                +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
                |                    Lifetime                   |
                +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
                |                                               |
                :  IPv4 Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers   :
                |                                               |
                +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+

             Figure 1: IPv4 Proxy Discovery DHCP option format

   Code:  Proxy Discovery option code (TBD) (8 bit)

   Len:  length of the option (without the Code and Len fields) in units
      of octets.  The minimum value is 8 if one IPv4 address is
      contained in the option.  Every additional IPv4 address increases
      the length by 4. (8-bit unsigned integer)

   Q: is set to one if proxy supports QUIC on port 443 (1 bit)

   Lifetime:  maximum time in seconds (relative to the time the packet
      is received) over which these IP4 addresses can be used for proxy
      discovery.  A value of all one bits (0xffff) represents infinity.
      A value of zero means that the proxy addresses SHOULD no longer be
      used. (16-bit unsigned integer)

   IPv4 Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers:  one or more 64-bit IPv4
      addresses of QUIC-based proxy servers.  The number of addresses is
      determined by the Length field.  That is, the number of addresses
      is equal to (Length - 4) / 4.










Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


        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-code          |          option-len           |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |         Reserved            |Q|            Lifetime           |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       :            IPv6 Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers         :
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

             Figure 2: IPv6 Proxy Discovery DHCP option format

   option-code:  Proxy Discovery option code (TBD) (16 bit)

   option-len:  length of the option (without the Type and Length
      fields) in units of octets.  The minimum value is 20 if one IPv6
      address is contained in the option.  Every additional IPv6 address
      increases the length by 16. (16-bit unsigned integer)

   Q: is set to one if proxy supports QUIC on port 443 (1 bit)

   Lifetime:  maximum time in seconds (relative to the time the packet
      is received) over which these IPv6 addresses can be used for proxy
      discovery.  A value of all one bits (0xffff) represents infinity.
      A value of zero means that the proxy addresses SHOULD no longer be
      used. (16-bit unsigned integer)

   IPv6 Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers:  one or more 128-bit IPv6
      addresses of QUIC-based proxy servers.  The number of addresses is
      determined by the Length field.  That is, the number of addresses
      is equal to (Length - 4) / 16.

3.  Using IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for Local Discovery

   If a proxy is located in the local network, information to discover a
   proxy service can be provided in a new Router Advertisement (RA)
   Option [RFC4861], the Proxy Discovery option.












Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


        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          |Q|
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                           Lifetime                            |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       :            IPv6 Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers         :
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                Figure 3: Proxy Discovery RA option format

   Type:  Proxy Discovery option type (TBD) (8 bit)

   Length:  length of the option (including the Type and Length fields)
      in units of 8 octets.  The minimum value is 3 if one IPv6 address
      is contained in the option.  Every additional IPv6 address
      increases the length by 2. (8-bit unsigned integer)

   Q: is set to one if proxy supports QUIC on port 443 (1 bit)

   Lifetime:  maximum time in seconds (relative to the time the packet
      is received) over which these IPv6 addresses can be used for proxy
      discovery.  A value of all one bits (0xffffffff) represents
      infinity.  A value of zero means that the proxy addresses SHOULD
      no longer be used. (32-bit unsigned integer)

   IPv6 Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers:  one or more 128-bit IPv6
      addresses of QUIC-based proxy servers.  The number of addresses is
      determined by the Length field.  That is, the number of addresses
      is equal to (Length - 1) / 2.

3.1.  Using PVDs

   If the local network provides configuration with an Explicit
   Provisioning Domain (PvD) [I-D.ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains],
   the RA defined above can be used with the PvD Option or alternatively
   proxy information can be retrieved in the additional information JSON
   files associated with the PvD ID.  The endhost resolves the URL
   provided in the PvD ID into an IP address using the local DNS server
   that is associated with the corresponding PvD (see also section 3.4.4
   of [I-D.ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains]).  If a QUIC-based proxy
   services is provided the additional information JSON file contains
   the key "QuicProxyIP".  It can then optionally also contain more
   information about the specific proxy services offered using the
   "ProxyService" key.  Or the client can connect directly to the proxy



Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


   over QUIC on port 443 and request information about the proxy service
   directly from the proxy server.

   For remote network a Web PvD might be available that contains proxy
   information.  If provided, the PvD JSON configuration file
   retrievable at the URI with the format:

    https://<Domain>/.well-known/pvd

4.  DNS Service Discovery (DNS-SD)

   [RFC6763] describes the use of SRV records to discover the available
   instances of a type of service.  To get a list of names of the
   available instance for a certain service a client requests records of
   type "PTR" (pointer from one name to another) in the DNS namespace
   [RFC1035] for a name containing the service and domain.

   As specified in [RFC6763] the client can perform a PTR query for a
   list of available proxy instance in the following way:

   _quicproxy._udp.<domain>

   here the <domain> portion is the domain name where the service is
   registered.  The domain name can be obtained via DHCP options or
   preconfigured.

   The result of this PTR lookup is a set of zero or more PTR records
   giving Service Instance names.  Then to contact a particular service,
   the client can query for the SRV [RFC2782] and TXT records of the
   selected service instance name.  The SRV record contains the IP
   address of the proxy service instance as well as the port number.
   The port number of QUIC-based proxy is usually expected to be 443 but
   may differ.  The TXT can contain additional information describing
   the kind of proxy services that is offered.

4.1.  Local discovery using mDNS

   [RFC6762] defines the use of ".local." for performing DNS like
   operations on the local link.  Any DNS query for a name ending
   "local." will be sent to a predefined IPv4 or IPv6 link local
   multicast address.

   To discover QUIC-based proxy services locally, the client request the
   PTR record for the name:

   _quicproxy._udp.local.





Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


   The result of this PTR lookup is a set of zero or more PTR records
   giving Service Instance Names of the form:

   <Instance>._quicproxy._udp.local.

      Editors' Note: Or _masque._udp ? Or _proxy._quic._udp or
      _quicproxy._http._udp ...? However in the later case the proxy
      should probably also actually offer a webpage...

4.2.  Discovery for Remote Domains

   If a client wants to discover a QUIC-based proxy server for a remote
   domain, this domain has to be known by the client, e.g. being
   preconfigured in the application.

5.  Using PCP options

   Port Control Protocol (PCP), described in [RFC6887], defines
   mechanism to do packet forwarding for different types of IPv4/Ipv6
   Network Address Translators (NAT) or firewalls.  Usual deployments of
   PCP include Carrier-Grade NAT (CGN), Customer-premises Equipment
   (CPE), or residential NATs.  When PCP is used to control address
   translation and forwarding, the PCP server can also be used to
   announce the existence of a QUIC-based proxy to the client.

   PCP allows options to be included in the PCP request and response
   header.  To announce information from the PCP server to the client,
   information about who to find a the QUIC-based proxy can be included
   in the response header as an option.  As [RFC6887] describes, the
   client will ignore any options that it does not understand.  A new
   PCP option carrying QUIC-based proxy information is speficied below.

        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 Code>  |  Reserved     |            Length           |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       :          IP Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers             :
       :                      (each 128 bits)                          :
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                Figure 4: Proxy Discovery PCP option format

   The fields are described below -





Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


   Option Code:  8 bits.  The most significant bit indicates if this
      option is mandatory (0) or optional (1) to process.

   Reserved:  8 bits.  MUST be set to 0 on transmission and MUST be
      ignored on reception.

   Option Length:

   :16 bits.  Indicates the length of the enclosed data, in octets.
   Options with length of 0 are allowed.  Options that are not a
   multiple of 4 octets long are followed by one, two, or three 0 octets
   to pad their effective length in the packet to be a multiple of 4
   octets.  The Option Length reflects the semantic length of the
   option, not including any padding octets.

   IP Addresses of QUIC-based Proxy Servers:  one or more IPv6 addresses
      and/or IPv4 addresses of QUIC-based proxy servers.  As specified
      in section 5 of [RFC6887] all addresses use fixed-size 128-bit
      fields.  When the address field holds an IPv4 address, an
      IPv4-mapped IPv6 address [RFC4291] is used (::ffff:0:0/96).  The
      number of addresses is determined by the Length field.  That is,
      the number of addresses is equal to Length/16.

6.  Using Anycast address

   Well-known IP anycast addresses can be used to start communicating
   with QUIC proxy or to discovery any or a list of unicast address of a
   QUIC proxy.  When the proxy receives the request for proxy
   functionalities, it can either decide to repsond to the client with
   the anycast address as source address or it can send back a list of
   unicast address with a redirect command.

      TODO: complete the description

7.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to assign two DHCP options, one for IPv4 and one
   for IPv6, in the "BOOTP Vendor Extensions and DHCP Options" registry
   (http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-dhcp-parameters), as specified
   in [RFC2939], and the "Option Codes" registry under DHCPv6 parameters
   (http://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6-parameters), respectively, as
   well a new value for the Proxy Discovery Option in the IPv6 Neighbor
   Discovery Option Formats registry.

   This document adds a key to the "Additional Information PvD Keys"
   registry, defined by [I-D.ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains].





Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


   JSON key      | Description        | Type    | Example
   ------------- | -----------------  | ------- | ---
   QuicProxyIP   | IP adress for      | Array of| "["2001:db8:::1",
                 | QUIC-based proxies | Strings |   "2001:db8:::2"]"
   --------------------------------------------------------------------
   ProxyService  | IDs identifying    | Array of| "["Forwarding",
                 | a specific service | Strings |   "DNSResolution"]"
   --------------------------------------------------------------------

   Further, IANA is requested to register a new service name "quicproxy"
   in the "Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry"
   (https://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-
   names-port-numbers.xhtml).

8.  Security Consideration

   Discovery mechanisms that are not authenticated provide no guarantees
   about the proxy configuration information provided.  In some
   scenarios a client may decide to use this information anyway, as
   either the local environment that the discovery was performed in is
   trusted, or the client has means to authenticate the identify of the
   proxy when connecting using QUIC and only uses the discovery to
   dynamically detect an IP address.

   Further even if the proxy is not trusted, simple forwarding or other
   network-based services may be used by the client if the forwarded
   traffic itself is end-to-end encrypted.  In this case the trust level
   should not be assumed to be higher than in the connectivity case
   without proxy usage.  Also note that even when the proxy is assumed
   to be untrusted, an attacker could still use the opportunity to
   redirect traffic over a specific node in order to more easily observe
   the traffic.  However, in this case the client is at least aware of
   the use of the proxy and therefore has means to potentially even
   identify the proxy provider, e.g. based on the IP or certificate.

   For further discussion of the security of each discovery mechanism,
   see also the security consideration section of these specifications.

9.  Contributors

10.  Acknowledgments

11.  References








Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


11.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains]
              Pfister, P., Vyncke, E., Pauly, T., Schinazi, D., and W.
              Shao, "Discovering Provisioning Domain Names and Data",
              draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning-domains-10 (work in
              progress), January 2020.

   [RFC1035]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
              specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, DOI 10.17487/RFC1035,
              November 1987, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1035>.

   [RFC2131]  Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",
              RFC 2131, DOI 10.17487/RFC2131, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2131>.

   [RFC2782]  Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
              specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2782, February 2000,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2782>.

   [RFC4291]  Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
              Architecture", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February
              2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4291>.

   [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>.

   [RFC6762]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Multicast DNS", RFC 6762,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6762, February 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6762>.

   [RFC6763]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
              Discovery", RFC 6763, DOI 10.17487/RFC6763, February 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6763>.

   [RFC6887]  Wing, D., Ed., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and
              P. Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", RFC 6887,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6887, April 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6887>.

   [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>.



Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft    QUIC Non-transparent Proxy Discovery      January 2020


11.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.kuehlewind-quic-substrate]
              Kuehlewind, M., Sarker, Z., Fossati, T., and L. Pardue,
              "Use Cases and Requirements for QUIC as a Substrate",
              draft-kuehlewind-quic-substrate-02 (work in progress),
              November 2019.

   [I-D.schinazi-masque]
              Schinazi, D., "The MASQUE Protocol", draft-schinazi-
              masque-02 (work in progress), January 2020.

   [RFC2939]  Droms, R., "Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition
              of New DHCP Options and Message Types", BCP 43, RFC 2939,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2939, September 2000,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2939>.

Authors' Addresses

   Mirja Kuehlewind
   Ericsson

   Email: mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com


   Zaheduzzaman Sarker
   Ericsson

   Email: zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com






















Kuehlewind & Sarker       Expires July 30, 2020                [Page 12]


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