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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 70 71 72 73 74 75

Network Working Group                                    F. Templin, Ed.
Internet-Draft                              Boeing Research & Technology
Obsoletes: rfc5320, rfc5558, rfc5720,                   October 20, 2014
           rfc6179, rfc6706 (if
           approved)
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: April 23, 2015


               Transmission of IP Packets over AERO Links
                     draft-templin-aerolink-45.txt

Abstract

   This document specifies the operation of IP over tunnel virtual links
   using Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization (AERO).  Nodes attached
   to AERO links can exchange packets via trusted intermediate routers
   that provide forwarding services to reach off-link destinations and
   redirection services for route optimization.  AERO provides an IPv6
   link-local address format known as the AERO address that supports
   operation of the IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (ND) protocol and links IPv6
   ND to IP forwarding.  Admission control and provisioning are
   supported by the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6
   (DHCPv6), and node mobility is naturally supported through dynamic
   neighbor cache updates.  Although DHCPv6 and IPv6 ND messaging is
   used in the control plane, both IPv4 and IPv6 are supported in the
   data plane.

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 April 23, 2015.







Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization (AERO) . . . . . . . .   6
     3.1.  AERO Link Reference Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  AERO Node Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.3.  AERO Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.4.  AERO Interface Characteristics  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.5.  AERO Link Initialization  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     3.6.  AERO Interface Initialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       3.6.1.  AERO Relay Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       3.6.2.  AERO Server Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       3.6.3.  AERO Client Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     3.7.  AERO Interface Routing System . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     3.8.  AERO Interface Neighbor Cache Maintenace  . . . . . . . .  13
     3.9.  AERO Interface Sending Algorithm  . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     3.10. AERO Interface Encapsulation, Re-encapsulation and
           Decapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     3.11. AERO Interface Data Origin Authentication . . . . . . . .  19
     3.12. AERO Interface MTU and Fragmentation  . . . . . . . . . .  19
       3.12.1.  Accommodating Large IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 Messages  . .  22
       3.12.2.  Integrity  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     3.13. AERO Interface Error Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
     3.14. AERO Router Discovery, Prefix Delegation and Address
           Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
       3.14.1.  AERO DHCPv6 Service Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
       3.14.2.  AERO Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
       3.14.3.  AERO Server Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31
     3.15. AERO Intradomain Route Optimization . . . . . . . . . . .  33
       3.15.1.  Reference Operational Scenario . . . . . . . . . . .  33
       3.15.2.  Concept of Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
       3.15.3.  Message Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


       3.15.4.  Sending Predirects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36
       3.15.5.  Re-encapsulating and Relaying Predirects . . . . . .  37
       3.15.6.  Processing Predirects and Sending Redirects  . . . .  38
       3.15.7.  Re-encapsulating and Relaying Redirects  . . . . . .  40
       3.15.8.  Processing Redirects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  41
       3.15.9.  Server-Oriented Redirection  . . . . . . . . . . . .  41
     3.16. Neighbor Unreachability Detection (NUD) . . . . . . . . .  41
     3.17. Mobility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  43
       3.17.1.  Announcing Link-Layer Address Changes  . . . . . . .  43
       3.17.2.  Bringing New Links Into Service  . . . . . . . . . .  44
       3.17.3.  Removing Existing Links from Service . . . . . . . .  45
       3.17.4.  Moving to a New Server . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  45
     3.18. Encapsulation Protocol Version Considerations . . . . . .  46
     3.19. Multicast Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
     3.20. Operation on AERO Links Without DHCPv6 Services . . . . .  46
     3.21. Operation on Server-less AERO Links . . . . . . . . . . .  46
     3.22. Proxy AERO  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  47
     3.23. Extending AERO Links Through Security Gateways  . . . . .  49
     3.24. Extending IPv6 AERO Links to the Internet . . . . . . . .  51
   4.  Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  55
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  55
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  57
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  61

1.  Introduction

   This document specifies the operation of IP over tunnel virtual links
   using Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization (AERO).  The AERO link
   can be used for tunneling to neighboring nodes over either IPv6 or
   IPv4 networks, i.e., AERO views the IPv6 and IPv4 networks as
   equivalent links for tunneling.  Nodes attached to AERO links can
   exchange packets via trusted intermediate routers that provide
   forwarding services to reach off-link destinations and redirection
   services for route optimization that addresses the requirements
   outlined in [RFC5522].

   AERO provides an IPv6 link-local address format known as the AERO
   address that supports operation of the IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (ND)
   [RFC4861] protocol and links IPv6 ND to IP forwarding.  Admission
   control and provisioning are supported by the Dynamic Host
   Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) [RFC3315], and node mobility
   is naturally supported through dynamic neighbor cache updates.
   Although DHCPv6 and IPv6 ND message signalling is used in the control




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   plane, both IPv4 and IPv6 can be used in the data plane.  The
   remainder of this document presents the AERO specification.

2.  Terminology

   The terminology in the normative references applies; the following
   terms are defined within the scope of this document:

   AERO link
      a Non-Broadcast, Multiple Access (NBMA) tunnel virtual overlay
      configured over a node's attached IPv6 and/or IPv4 networks.  All
      nodes on the AERO link appear as single-hop neighbors from the
      perspective of the virtual overlay.

   AERO interface
      a node's attachment to an AERO link.

   AERO address
      an IPv6 link-local address constructed as specified in Section 3.3
      and assigned to a Client's AERO interface.

   AERO node
      a node that is connected to an AERO link and that participates in
      IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 messaging over the link.

   AERO Client ("Client")
      a node that assigns an AERO address to an AERO interface and
      receives an IP prefix via a DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation (PD) exchange
      with one or more AERO Servers.

   AERO Server ("Server")
      a node that configures an AERO interface to provide default
      forwarding and DHCPv6 services for AERO Clients.  The Server
      assigns the IPv6 link-local subnet router anycast address (fe80::)
      to the AERO interface and also assigns an administratively
      assigned IPv6 link-local unicast address used for operation of
      DHCPv6 and the IPv6 ND protocol.

   AERO Relay ("Relay")
      a node that configures an AERO interface to relay IP packets
      between nodes on the same AERO link and/or forward IP packets
      between the AERO link and the native Internetwork.  The Relay
      assigns an administratively assigned IPv6 link-local unicast
      address to the AERO interface the same as for a Server.

   ingress tunnel endpoint (ITE)
      an AERO interface endpoint that injects tunneled packets into an
      AERO link.



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   egress tunnel endpoint (ETE)
      an AERO interface endpoint that receives tunneled packets from an
      AERO link.

   underlying network
      a connected IPv6 or IPv4 network routing region over which the
      tunnel virtual overlay is configured.  A typical example is an
      enterprise network.

   underlying interface
      an AERO node's interface point of attachment to an underlying
      network.

   link-layer address
      an IP address assigned to an AERO node's underlying interface.
      When UDP encapsulation is used, the UDP port number is also
      considered as part of the link-layer address.  Link-layer
      addresses are used as the encapsulation header source and
      destination addresses.

   network layer address
      the source or destination address of the encapsulated IP packet.

   end user network (EUN)
      an internal virtual or external edge IP network that an AERO
      Client connects to the rest of the network via the AERO interface.

   AERO Service Prefix (ASP)
      an IP prefix associated with the AERO link and from which AERO
      Client Prefixes (ACPs) are derived (for example, the IPv6 ACP
      2001:db8:1:2::/64 is derived from the IPv6 ASP 2001:db8::/32).

   AERO Client Prefix (ACP)
      a more-specific IP prefix taken from an ASP and delegated to a
      Client.

   Throughout the document, the simple terms "Client", "Server" and
   "Relay" refer to "AERO Client", "AERO Server" and "AERO Relay",
   respectively.  Capitalization is used to distinguish these terms from
   DHCPv6 client/server/relay [RFC3315].

   The terminology of [RFC4861] (including the names of node variables
   and protocol constants) applies to this document.  Also throughout
   the document, the term "IP" is used to generically refer to either
   Internet Protocol version (i.e., IPv4 or IPv6).






Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   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].

3.  Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization (AERO)

   The following sections specify the operation of IP over Asymmetric
   Extended Route Optimization (AERO) links:

3.1.  AERO Link Reference Model

                              .-(::::::::)
                           .-(:::: IP ::::)-.
                          (:: Internetwork ::)
                           `-(::::::::::::)-'
                              `-(::::::)-'
                                   |
       +--------------+   +--------+-------+   +--------------+
       |AERO Server S1|   | AERO Relay R1  |   |AERO Server S2|
       |  Nbr: C1; R1 |   |   Nbr: S1; S2  |   |  Nbr: C2; R1 |
       |  default->R1 |   |(H1->S1; H2->S2)|   |  default->R1 |
       |    H1->C1    |   +--------+-------+   |    H2->C2    |
       +-------+------+            |           +------+-------+
               |                   |                  |
       X---+---+-------------------+------------------+---+---X
           |                  AERO Link                   |
     +-----+--------+                            +--------+-----+
     |AERO Client C1|                            |AERO Client C2|
     |    Nbr: S1   |                            |   Nbr: S2    |
     | default->S1  |                            | default->S2  |
     +--------------+                            +--------------+
           .-.                                         .-.
        ,-(  _)-.                                   ,-(  _)-.
     .-(_   IP  )-.                              .-(_   IP  )-.
    (__    EUN      )                           (__    EUN      )
       `-(______)-'                                `-(______)-'
            |                                           |
        +--------+                                  +--------+
        | Host H1|                                  | Host H2|
        +--------+                                  +--------+

                    Figure 1: AERO Link Reference Model

   Figure 1 above presents the AERO link reference model.  In this
   model:






Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   o  Relay R1 acts as a default router for its associated Servers S1
      and S2, and connects the AERO link to the rest of the IP
      Internetwork

   o  Servers S1 and S2 associate with Relay R1 and also act as default
      routers for their associated Clients C1 and C2.

   o  Clients C1 and C2 associate with Servers S1 and S2, respectively
      and also act as default routers for their associated EUNs

   o  Hosts H1 and H2 attach to the EUNs served by Clients C1 and C2,
      respectively

   In common operational practice, there may be many additional Relays,
   Servers and Clients.

3.2.  AERO Node Types

   AERO Relays provide default forwarding services to AERO Servers.
   Relays forward packets between Servers connected to the same AERO
   link and also forward packets between the AERO link and the native IP
   Internetwork.  Relays present the AERO link to the native
   Internetwork as a set of one or more AERO Service Prefixes (ASPs) and
   serve as a gateway between the AERO link and the Internetwork.  AERO
   Relays maintain an AERO interface neighbor cache entry for each AERO
   Server, and maintain an IP forwarding table entry for each AERO
   Client Prefix (ACP).

   AERO Servers provide default forwarding services to AERO Clients.
   Each Server also peers with each Relay in a dynamic routing protocol
   instance to advertise its list of associated ACPs.  Servers configure
   a DHCPv6 server function to facilitate Prefix Delegation (PD)
   exchanges with Clients.  Each delegated prefix becomes an ACP taken
   from an ASP.  Servers forward packets between Clients and Relays, as
   well as between Clients and other Clients associated with the same
   Server.  (Server-to-Server forwarding is also enabled in some cases).
   AERO Servers maintain an AERO interface neighbor cache entry for each
   AERO Relay.  They also maintain both a neighbor cache entry and an IP
   forwarding table entry for each of their associated Clients.

   AERO Clients act as requesting routers to receive ACPs through DHCPv6
   PD exchanges with AERO Servers over the AERO link and sub-delegate
   portions of their ACPs to EUN interfaces.  (Each Client MAY associate
   with a single Server or with multiple Servers, e.g., for fault
   tolerance and/or load balancing.)  Each IPv6 Client receives at least
   a /64 IPv6 ACP, and may receive even shorter prefixes.  Similarly,
   each IPv4 Client receives at least a /32 IPv4 ACP (i.e., a singleton
   IPv4 address), and may receive even shorter prefixes.  AERO Clients



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   maintain an AERO interface neighbor cache entry for each of their
   associated Servers as well as for each of their correspondent
   Clients.

   AERO Clients that act as hosts typically configure a TUN/TAP
   interface [TUNTAP] as a point-to-point linkage between the IP layer
   and the AERO interface.  The IP layer therefore sees only the TUN/TAP
   interface, while the AERO interface provides an intermediate conduit
   between the TUN/TAP interface and the underlying interfaces.  AERO
   Clients that act as hosts assign one or more IP addresses from their
   ACPs to the TUN/TAP interface, i.e., and not to the AERO interface.

3.3.  AERO Addresses

   An AERO address is an IPv6 link-local address with an embedded ACP
   and assigned to a Client's AERO interface.  The AERO address is
   formed as follows:

      fe80::[ACP]

   For IPv6, the AERO address begins with the prefix fe80::/64 and
   includes in its interface identifier the base prefix taken from the
   Client's IPv6 ACP.  The base prefix is determined by masking the ACP
   with the prefix length.  For example, if the AERO Client receives the
   IPv6 ACP:

      2001:db8:1000:2000::/56

   it constructs its AERO address as:

      fe80::2001:db8:1000:2000

   For IPv4, the AERO address is formed from the lower 64 bits of an
   IPv4-mapped IPv6 address [RFC4291] that includes the base prefix
   taken from the Client's IPv4 ACP.  For example, if the AERO Client
   receives the IPv4 ACP:

      192.0.2.32/28

   it constructs its AERO address as:

      fe80::FFFF:192.0.2.32

   The AERO address remains stable as the Client moves between
   topological locations, i.e., even if its link-layer addresses change.

   NOTE: In some cases, prospective neighbors may not have advanced
   knowledge of the Client's ACP length and may therefore send initial



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   IPv6 ND messages with an AERO destination address that matches the
   ACP but does not correspond to the base prefix.  In that case, the
   Client MUST accept the address as equivalent to the base address, but
   then use the base address as the source address of any IPv6 ND
   message replies.  For example, if the Client receives the IPv6 ACP
   2001:db8:1000:2000::/56 then subsequently receives an IPv6 ND message
   with destination address fe80::2001:db8:1000:2001, it accepts the
   message but uses fe80::2001:db8:1000:2000 as the source address of
   any IPv6 ND replies.

3.4.  AERO Interface Characteristics

   AERO interfaces use IP-in-IPv6 encapsulation [RFC2473] to exchange
   tunneled packets with AERO neighbors attached to an underlying IPv6
   network, and use IP-in-IPv4 encapsulation [RFC2003][RFC4213] to
   exchange tunneled packets with AERO neighbors attached to an
   underlying IPv4 network.  AERO interfaces can also coordinate secured
   tunnel types such as IPsec [RFC4301] or TLS [RFC5246].  When Network
   Address Translator (NAT) traversal and/or filtering middlebox
   traversal may be necessary, a UDP header is further inserted
   immediately above the IP encapsulation header.

   AERO interfaces maintain a neighbor cache, and AERO Clients and
   Servers use an adaptation of standard unicast IPv6 ND messaging.
   AERO interfaces use unicast Neighbor Solicitation (NS), Neighbor
   Advertisement (NA), Router Solicitation (RS) and Router Advertisement
   (RA) messages the same as for any IPv6 link.  AERO interfaces use two
   redirection message types -- the first known as a Predirect message
   and the second being the standard Redirect message (see
   Section 3.15).  AERO links further use link-local-only addressing;
   hence, AERO nodes ignore any Prefix Information Options (PIOs) they
   may receive in RA messages over an AERO interface.

   AERO interface ND messages include one or more Target Link-Layer
   Address Options (TLLAOs) formatted as shown in Figure 2:
















Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


        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 = 2   |   Length = 3  |           Reserved            |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |    Link ID    |   Preference  |        UDP Port Number        |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       +--                                                           --+
       |                                                               |
       +--                        IP Address                         --+
       |                                                               |
       +--                                                           --+
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


      Figure 2: AERO Target Link-Layer Address Option (TLLAO) Format

   In this format, Link ID is an integer value between 0 and 255
   corresponding to an underlying interface of the target node, and
   Preference is an integer value between 0 and 255 indicating the
   node's preference for this underlying interface (with 255 being the
   highest preference, 1 being the lowest, and 0 meaning "link
   disabled").  UDP Port Number and IP Address are set to the addresses
   used by the target node when it sends encapsulated packets over the
   underlying interface.  When the encapsulation IP address family is
   IPv4, IP Address is formed as an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address [RFC4291].

   AERO interfaces may be configured over multiple underlying
   interfaces.  For example, common mobile handheld devices have both
   wireless local area network ("WLAN") and cellular wireless links.
   These links are typically used "one at a time" with low-cost WLAN
   preferred and highly-available cellular wireless as a standby.  In a
   more complex example, aircraft frequently have many wireless data
   link types (e.g. satellite-based, terrestrial, air-to-air
   directional, etc.) with diverse performance and cost properties.

   If a Client's multiple underlying interfaces are used "one at a time"
   (i.e., all other interfaces are in standby mode while one interface
   is active), then Redirect, Predirect and unsolicited NA messages
   include only a single TLLAO with Link ID set to a constant value.

   If the Client has multiple active underlying interfaces, then from
   the perspective of IPv6 ND it would appear to have a single link-
   local address with multiple link-layer addresses.  In that case,
   Redirect, Predirect and unsolicited NA messages MAY include multiple




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   TLLAOs -- each with a different Link ID that corresponds to a
   specific underlying interface of the Client.

3.5.  AERO Link Initialization

   When an administrative authority first deploys a set of AERO Relays
   and Servers that comprise an AERO link, they assign a unique domain
   name for the link, e.g., "example.com".  Next, if the administrative
   policy permits Clients within the domain to serve as correspondent
   nodes for Internet mobile nodes, the administrative authority adds a
   Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) for each of the AERO link's ASPs
   to the Domain Name System (DNS) [RFC1035].  The FQDN is based on the
   suffix "aero.linkupnetworks.net" with a wildcard-terminated reverse
   mapping of the ASP [RFC3596][RFC4592], and resolves to a DNS PTR
   resource record.  For example, for the ASP '2001:db8:1::/48' within
   the domain name "example.com", the DNS database contains:

   '*.1.0.0.0.8.b.d.0.1.0.0.2.aero.linkupnetworks.net.  PTR example.com'

   This mapping advertises the AERO link's ASPs to prospective mobile
   nodes.

3.6.  AERO Interface Initialization

3.6.1.  AERO Relay Behavior

   When a Relay enables an AERO interface, it first assigns an
   administratively-assigned link-local address fe80::ID to the
   interface.  Each fe80::ID address MUST be unique among all Relays and
   Servers on the link, and MUST NOT collide with any potential AERO
   addresses.  The addresses are typically taken from the range
   fe80::/96, e.g., as fe80::1, fe80::2, fe80::3, etc.  The Relay then
   engages in a dynamic routing protocol session with all Servers on the
   link (see: Section 3.7), and advertises the set of ASPs into the
   native IP Internetwork.

   Each Relay subsequently maintains an IP forwarding table entry for
   each Client-Server association, and maintains a neighbor cache entry
   for each Server on the link.  Relays do not require the use of IPv6
   ND messaging since the dynamic routing protocol already provides
   reachability information.  At a minimum, however, Relays respond to a
   Server's NS messages by returning an NA.

3.6.2.  AERO Server Behavior

   When a Server enables an AERO interface, it assigns the address
   fe80:: to the interface as a link-local Subnet Router Anycast
   address, and also assigns an administratively assigned link-local



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   address fe80::ID the same as for Relays.  (The Server then accepts
   DHCPv6 and IPv6 ND solicitation messages destined to either the
   fe80:: or fe80::ID addresses, but always uses fe80::ID as the source
   address in the replies it generates.)  The Server further configures
   a DHCPv6 server function to facilitate DHCPv6 PD exchanges with AERO
   Clients.  The Server maintains a neighbor cache entry for each Relay
   on the link, and manages per-Client neighbor cache entries and IP
   forwarding table entries based on control message exchanges.  Each
   Server also engages in a dynamic routing protocol with each Relay on
   the link (see: Section 3.7).

   When the Server receives an NS/RS message on the AERO interface it
   returns an NA/RA message but does not update the neighbor cache.  The
   Server further provides a simple conduit between Clients and Relays,
   between Clients and other Clients and between Clients and other
   Servers.  Therefore, packets enter the Server's AERO interface from
   the link layer and are forwarded back out the link layer without ever
   leaving the AERO interface and therefore without ever disturbing the
   network layer.

3.6.3.  AERO Client Behavior

   When a Client enables an AERO interface, it invokes DHCPv6 PD to
   receive an ACP from an AERO Server.  Next, it assigns the
   corresponding AERO address to the AERO interface and creates a
   neighbor cache entry for the Server, i.e., the PD exchange bootstraps
   the provisioning of a unique link-local address.  The Client
   maintains a neighbor cache entry for each of its Servers and each of
   its active correspondent Clients.  When the Client receives Redirect/
   Predirect messages on the AERO interface it updates or creates
   neighbor cache entries, including link-layer address information.
   Unsolicited NA messages update the cached link-layer addresses for
   correspondent Clients (e.g., following a link-layer address change
   due to node mobility) but do not create new neighbor cache entries.
   NS/NA messages used for Neighbor Unreachability Detection (NUD)
   update timers in existing neighbor cache entires but do not update
   link-layer addresses nor create new neighbor cache entries.

   Finally, the Client need not maintain any IP forwarding table entries
   for its Servers or correspondent Clients.  Instead, it can set a
   single "route-to-interface" default route in the IP forwarding table,
   and all forwarding decisions can be made within the AERO interface
   based on neighbor cache entries.  (On systems in which adding a
   default route would violate security policy, the default route could
   instead be installed via a "synthesized RA", e.g., as discussed in
   Section 3.14.2.)





Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.7.  AERO Interface Routing System

   Relays require full topology information of all Client/Server
   associations, while individual Servers only need to know the ACPs
   associated with their current set of associated Clients.  This is
   accomplished through the use of an internal instance of the Border
   Gateway Protocol (BGP) [RFC4271] coordinated between Servers and
   Relays.  This internal BGP instance does not interact with the public
   Internet BGP instance; therefore, the AERO link is presented to the
   IP Internetwork as a small set of ASPs as opposed to the full set of
   individual ACPs.

   In a reference BGP arrangement, each AERO Server is configured as an
   Autonomous System Border Router (ASBR) for a stub Autonomous System
   (AS) (possibly using a private AS Number (ASN) [RFC1930]), and each
   Server further peers with each Relay but does not peer with other
   Servers.  Similarly, Relays do not peer with each other, since they
   will reliably receive all updates from all Servers and will therefore
   have a consistent view of the AERO link ACP delegations.

   Each Server maintains a working set of associated Clients, and
   dynamically announces new ACPs and withdraws departed ACPs in its BGP
   updates to Relays.  Relays do not send BGP updates to Servers,
   however, such that the BGP route reporting is unidirectional from
   Servers to Relays.

   Relays therefore discover the full topology of the AERO link in terms
   of the working set of ACPs associated with each Server, while Servers
   only discover the ACPs of their associated Clients.  Since Clients
   are expected to remain associated with their current set of Servers
   for extended timeframes, the amount of BGP control messaging between
   Servers and Relays should be minimal.  However, BGP Servers SHOULD
   dampen any route oscillations caused by impatient Clients that
   repeatedly associate and disassociate with them.

   In environments where sustained packet forwarding over AERO Relays
   would present an undesirable data plane burden, Relays can instead be
   configured to report all ACPs to all Servers while including a BGP
   Remote-Next-Hop [I-D.vandevelde-idr-remote-next-hop].  The Server
   then creates a neighbor cache entry for each ACP with the Remote-
   Next-Hop as the link-layer address to enable Server-to-Server route
   optimization.

3.8.  AERO Interface Neighbor Cache Maintenace

   Each AERO interface maintains a conceptual neighbor cache that
   includes an entry for each neighbor it communicates with on the AERO
   link, the same as for any IPv6 interface [RFC4861].  AERO interface



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   neighbor cache entires are said to be one of "permanent", "static" or
   "dynamic".

   Permanent neighbor cache entries are created through explicit
   administrative action; they have no timeout values and remain in
   place until explicitly deleted.  AERO Relays maintain a permanent
   neighbor cache entry for each Server on the link, and AERO Servers
   maintain a permanent neighbor cache entry for each Relay.  Each entry
   maintains the mapping between the neighbor's fe80::ID network-layer
   address and corresponding link-layer address.

   Static neighbor cache entries are created though DHCPv6 PD exchanges
   and remain in place for durations bounded by prefix lifetimes.  AERO
   Servers maintain a static neighbor cache entry for each of their
   associated Clients, and AERO Clients maintain a static neighbor cache
   for each of their associated Servers.  When an AERO Server sends a
   DHCPv6 Reply message response to a Client's DHCPv6 Solicit/Request or
   Renew message, it creates or updates a static neighbor cache entry
   based on the Client's AERO address as the network-layer address, the
   prefix lifetime as the neighbor cache entry lifetime, the Client's
   encapsulation IP address and UDP port number as the link-layer
   address and the prefix length as the length to apply to the AERO
   address.  When an AERO Client receives a DHCPv6 Reply message from a
   Server, it creates or updates a static neighbor cache entry based on
   the Reply message link-local source address as the network-layer
   address, the prefix lifetime as the neighbor cache entry lifetime,
   and the encapsulation IP source address and UDP source port number as
   the link-layer address.

   Dynamic neighbor cache entries are created based on receipt of an
   IPv6 ND message, and are garbage-collected if not used within a short
   timescale.  AERO Clients maintain dynamic neighbor cache entries for
   each of their active correspondent Clients with lifetimes based on
   IPv6 ND messaging constants.  When an AERO Client receives a valid
   Predirect message it creates or updates a dynamic neighbor cache
   entry for the Predirect target network-layer and link-layer addresses
   plus prefix length.  The node then sets an "AcceptTime" variable in
   the neighbor cache entry to ACCEPT_TIME seconds and uses this value
   to determine whether packets received from the correspondent can be
   accepted.  When an AERO Client receives a valid Redirect message it
   creates or updates a dynamic neighbor cache entry for the Redirect
   target network-layer and link-layer addresses plus prefix length.
   The Client then sets a "ForwardTime" variable in the neighbor cache
   entry to FORWARD_TIME seconds and uses this value to determine
   whether packets can be sent directly to the correspondent.  The
   Client also sets a "MaxRetry" variable to MAX_RETRY to limit the
   number of keepalives sent when a correspondent may have gone
   unreachable.



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 14]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   For dynamic neighbor cache entries, when an AERO Client receives a
   valid NS message it (re)sets AcceptTime for the neighbor to
   ACCEPT_TIME.  When an AERO Client receives a valid solicited NA
   message, it (re)sets ForwardTime for the neighbor to FORWARD_TIME and
   sets MaxRetry to MAX_RETRY.  When an AERO Client receives a valid
   unsolicited NA message, it updates the correspondent's link-layer
   addresses but DOES NOT reset AcceptTime, ForwardTime or MaxRetry.

   It is RECOMMENDED that FORWARD_TIME be set to the default constant
   value 30 seconds to match the default REACHABLE_TIME value specified
   for IPv6 ND [RFC4861].

   It is RECOMMENDED that ACCEPT_TIME be set to the default constant
   value 40 seconds to allow a 10 second window so that the AERO
   redirection procedure can converge before AcceptTime decrements below
   FORWARD_TIME.

   It is RECOMMENDED that MAX_RETRY be set to 3 the same as described
   for IPv6 ND address resolution in Section 7.3.3 of [RFC4861].

   Different values for FORWARD_TIME, ACCEPT_TIME, and MAX_RETRY MAY be
   administratively set, if necessary, to better match the AERO link's
   performance characteristics; however, if different values are chosen,
   all nodes on the link MUST consistently configure the same values.
   Most importantly, ACCEPT_TIME SHOULD be set to a value that is
   sufficiently longer than FORWARD_TIME to allow the AERO redirection
   procedure to converge.

3.9.  AERO Interface Sending Algorithm

   IP packets enter a node's AERO interface either from the network
   layer (i.e., from a local application or the IP forwarding system),
   or from the link layer (i.e., from the AERO tunnel virtual link).
   Packets that enter the AERO interface from the network layer are
   encapsulated and admitted into the AERO link, i.e., they are
   tunnelled to an AERO interface neighbor.  Packets that enter the AERO
   interface from the link layer are either re-admitted into the AERO
   link or delivered to the network layer where they are subject to
   either local delivery or IP forwarding.  Since each AERO node has
   only partial information about neighbors on the link, AERO interfaces
   may forward packets with link-local destination addresses at a layer
   below the network layer.  This means that AERO nodes act as both IP
   routers and sub-IP layer forwarding agents.  AERO interface sending
   considerations for Clients, Servers and Relays are given below.

   When an IP packet enters a Client's AERO interface from the network
   layer, if the destination is covered by an ASP the Client searches
   for a dynamic neighbor cache entry with a non-zero ForwardTime and an



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 15]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   AERO address that matches the packet's destination address.  (The
   destination address may be either an address covered by the
   neighbor's ACP or the (link-local) AERO address itself.)  If there is
   a match, the Client uses a link-layer address in the entry as the
   link-layer address for encapsulation then admits the packet into the
   AERO link.  If there is no match, the Client instead uses the link-
   layer address of a neighboring Server as the link-layer address for
   encapsulation.

   When an IP packet enters a Server's AERO interface from the link
   layer, if the destination is covered by an ASP the Server searches
   for a neighbor cache entry with an AERO address that matches the
   packet's destination address.  (The destination address may be either
   an address covered by the neighbor's ACP or the AERO address itself.)
   If there is a match, the Server uses a link-layer address in the
   entry as the link-layer address for encapsulation and re-admits the
   packet into the AERO link.  If there is no match, the Server instead
   uses the link-layer address in a permanent neighbor cache entry for a
   Relay as the link-layer address for encapsulation.

   When an IP packet enters a Relay's AERO interface from the network
   layer, the Relay searches its IP forwarding table for an entry that
   is covered by an ASP and also matches the destination.  If there is a
   match, the Relay uses the link-layer address in the neighbor cache
   entry for the next-hop Server as the link-layer address for
   encapsulation and admits the packet into the AERO link.  When an IP
   packet enters a Relay's AERO interface from the link-layer, if the
   destination is not a link-local address and is does not match an ASP
   the Relay removes the packet from the AERO interface and uses IP
   forwarding to forward the packet to the Internetwork.  If the
   destination address is a link-local address or a non-link-local
   address that matches an ASP, and there is a more-specific ACP entry
   in the IP forwarding table, the Relay uses the link-layer address in
   the corresponding neighbor cache entry for the next-hop Server as the
   link-layer address for encapsulation and re-admits the packet into
   the AERO link.  When an IP packet enters a Relay's AERO interface
   from either the network layer or link-layer, and the packet's
   destination address matches an ASP but there is no more-specific ACP
   entry, the Relay drops the packet and returns an ICMP Destination
   Unreachable message (see: Section 3.13).

   When an AERO Server receives a packet from a Relay via the AERO
   interface, the Server MUST NOT forward the packet back to the same or
   a different Relay.

   When an AERO Relay receives a packet from a Server via the AERO
   interface, the Relay MUST NOT forward the packet back to the same
   Server.



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 16]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   When an AERO node re-admits a packet into the AERO link without
   involving the network layer, the node MUST NOT decrement the network
   layer TTL/Hop-count.

   AERO interfaces may determine the link-layer address for
   encapsulation through consulting either the neighbor cache or the IP
   forwarding table.  IP forwarding is therefore linked to IPv6 ND via
   the AERO address.

3.10.  AERO Interface Encapsulation, Re-encapsulation and Decapsulation

   AERO interfaces encapsulate IP packets according to whether they are
   entering the AERO interface from the network layer or if they are
   being re-admitted into the same AERO link they arrived on.  This
   latter form of encapsulation is known as "re-encapsulation".

   The AERO interface encapsulates packets per the base tunneling
   specifications (e.g.,
   [RFC2003][RFC2473][RFC2784][RFC4213][RFC4301][RFC5246], etc.) except
   that it inserts a UDP header immediately following the IP
   encapsulation header and immediately before the next header.

   If the next header is an IPv4 or IPv6 header and the packet is an
   ordinary data packet, no other encapsulations are necessary.  For all
   others (including IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 messages), the AERO interface
   MUST insert an AERO shim header immediately following the UDP header
   formatted as shown in Figure 3:

         0                   1
         0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        | Vers1 | Vers2 |  Next Header  |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                        Figure 3: AERO Shim Header

   In the AERO shim header, "Vers1" encodes the value '0', "Vers2"
   encodes the value '1', and "Next Header" encodes the IP protocol
   number corresponding to the next header in the encapsulation.  For
   example, "Next Header" encodes the value '4' for an IPv4 header, '41'
   for an IPv6 header, '44' for the IPv6 Fragment Header, '47' for GRE,
   '50' for ESP, '51' for AH, etc. (other Next Header values are found
   in the IANA "protocol numbers" registry).

   During encapsulation, the AERO interface copies the "TTL/Hop Limit",
   "Type of Service/Traffic Class" and "Congestion Experienced" values
   in the packet's IP header into the corresponding fields in the
   encapsulation IP header.  For packets undergoing re-encapsulation,



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 17]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   the AERO interface instead copies the "TTL/Hop Limit", "Type of
   Service/Traffic Class" and "Congestion Experienced" values in the
   original encapsulation IP header into the corresponding fields in the
   new encapsulation IP header (i.e., the values are transferred between
   encapsulation headers and *not* copied from the encapsulated packet's
   network-layer header).  Note that these instructions may represent a
   deviation from those found in the base tunneling specifications.

   The AERO interface next sets the UDP source port to a constant value
   that it will use in each successive packet it sends, and sets the UDP
   length field to the length of the encapsulated packet plus 8 bytes
   for the UDP header itself (or plus 10 bytes if an AERO shim header is
   also included).  For packets sent via a Server, the AERO interface
   sets the UDP destination port to 8060, i.e., the IANA-registered port
   number for AERO.  For packets sent to a correspondent Client, the
   AERO interface sets the UDP destination port to the port value stored
   in the neighbor cache entry for this correspondent.  The AERO
   interface also sets the UDP checksum field to zero (see:
   [RFC6935][RFC6936]) unless an integrity check is required (see:
   Section 3.12.2).

   The AERO interface next sets the IP protocol number in the
   encapsulation header to 17 (i.e., the IP protocol number for UDP).
   When IPv6 is used as the encapsulation protocol, the interface then
   sets the flow label value in the encapsulation header the same as
   described in [RFC6438].  When IPv4 is used as the encapsulation
   protocol, the AERO interface sets the DF bit as discussed in
   Section 3.12.

   AERO interfaces decapsulate packets destined either to the node
   itself or to a destination reached via an interface other than the
   AERO interface the packet was received on.  When the AERO interface
   receives a UDP packet, it examines the first octet of the
   encapsulated packet.  If the most significant four bits of the first
   octet encode the value '6' (i.e., the IP version number value for
   IPv6) or the value '4' (i.e., the IP version number value for IPv4),
   the AERO interface discards the encapsulation headers and accepts the
   encapsulated packet as an ordinary IPv6 or IPv4 data packet,
   respectively (this is often referred to as "fast path processing").

   If the most significant four bits encode the value '0' and the next
   four bits encode the value '1', however, the AERO interface processes
   the next octet as a "Next Header" field, i.e., the interface treats
   the first two octets of the encapsulated packet as an AERO shim
   header as shown in Figure 3 (note that the "Vers2" value is set to 1
   to distinguish AERO encapsulations from the experimental message
   formats specified in [RFC6706]).  Further processing then proceeds
   according to the appropriate base tunneling specification and/or



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 18]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   control message type (this is often referred to as "slow path
   processing").

3.11.  AERO Interface Data Origin Authentication

   AERO nodes employ simple data origin authentication procedures for
   encapsulated packets they receive from other nodes on the AERO link.
   In particular:

   o  AERO Relays and Servers accept encapsulated packets with a link-
      layer source address that matches a permanent neighbor cache
      entry.

   o  AERO Servers accept authentic encapsulated DHCPv6 messages, and
      create or update a static neighbor cache entry for the source
      based on the specific message type.

   o  AERO Servers accept encapsulated packets if there is a neighbor
      cache entry with an AERO address that matches the packet's
      network-layer source address and with a link-layer address that
      matches the packet's link-layer source address.

   o  AERO Clients accept encapsulated packets if there is a static
      neighbor cache entry with a link-layer source address that matches
      the packet's link-layer source address.

   o  AERO Clients and Servers accept encapsulated packets if there is a
      dynamic neighbor cache entry with an AERO address that matches the
      packet's network-layer source address, with a link-layer address
      that matches the packet's link-layer source address, and with a
      non-zero AcceptTime.

   Note that this simple data origin authentication is effective in
   environments in which link-layer addresses cannot be spoofed.
   Additional security mitigations may be necessary in other
   environments.

3.12.  AERO Interface MTU and Fragmentation

   The AERO interface is the node's point of attachment to the AERO
   link.  AERO links over IP networks have a maximum link MTU of 64KB
   minus the encapsulation overhead (termed here "ENCAPS"), since the
   maximum packet size in the base IP specifications is 64KB
   [RFC0791][RFC2460] (while IPv6 jumbograms can be up to 4GB, they are
   considered optional for IPv6 nodes [RFC2675][RFC6434]).

   IPv6 specifies a minimum link MTU of 1280 bytes [RFC2460].  This is
   the minimum packet size the AERO interface MUST admit without



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 19]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   returning an ICMP Packet Too Big (PTB) message.  Although IPv4
   specifies a smaller minimum link MTU of 68 bytes [RFC0791], AERO
   interfaces also observe a 1280 byte minimum for IPv4.  Additionally,
   the vast majority of links in the Internet configure an MTU of at
   least 1500 bytes.  Original source hosts have therefore become
   conditioned to expect that IP packets up to 1500 bytes in length will
   either be delivered to the final destination or a suitable PTB
   message returned.  However, PTB messages may be lost in the network
   [RFC2923] resulting in failure of the IP MTU discovery mechanisms
   [RFC1191][RFC1981].

   For these reasons, AERO interfaces MUST admit packets up to 1500
   bytes in length even if some fragmentation is necessary.  AERO
   interfaces MAY admit even larger packets as long as they can be
   accommodated without fragmentation.

   For AERO links over IPv4, the IP ID field is only 16 bits in length,
   meaning that fragmentation at high data rates could result in data
   corruption due to reassembly misassociations [RFC6864][RFC4963] (see:
   Section 3.12.2).  For AERO links over both IPv4 and IPv6, studies
   have also shown that IP fragments are dropped unconditionally over
   some network paths [I-D.taylor-v6ops-fragdrop].  For these reasons,
   when fragmentation is needed it is performed within the AERO
   interface (i.e., instead of at the encapsulating IP layer) through
   the insertion of an IPv6 Fragment Header [RFC2460].  Since the
   Fragment Header reduces the room available for packet data, but the
   original source has no way to control its insertion, the Fragment
   Header length plus the length of the AERO shim header (see:
   Section 3.10) MUST be included in the ENCAPS length even for packets
   in which the headers do not appear.

   The source AERO interface (i.e., the tunnel ingress) therefore sends
   encapsulated packets to the destination AERO interface (i.e., the
   tunnel egress) according to the following algorithm:

   o  For IP packets that are no larger than (1280-ENCAPS) bytes, the
      tunnel ingress encapsulates the packet and admits it into the
      tunnel without fragmentation.  For IPv4 AERO links, tunnel ingress
      sets the Don't Fragment (DF) bit to 0 so that these packets will
      be delivered to the tunnel egress even if there is a restricting
      link in the path, i.e., unless lost due to congestion or routing
      errors.

   o  For IP packets that are larger than (1280-ENCAPS) bytes but no
      larger than 1500 bytes, the tunnel ingress encapsulates the packet
      and inserts a Fragment Header and AERO shim header above the UDP/
      IP encapsulation headers.  Next, the tunnel ingress uses the
      fragmentation algorithm in [RFC2460] to break the packet into two



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 20]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


      non-overlapping fragments where the first fragment (including
      ENCAPS) is no larger than 1024 bytes and the second is no larger
      than the first.  Each fragment consists of identical AERO/UDP/IP
      encapsulation headers, followed by the Fragment Header followed by
      the fragment of the encapsulated packet itself.  The tunnel
      ingress then admits both fragments into the tunnel, and for IPv4
      sets the DF bit to 0 in the IP encapsulation header.  These
      fragmented encapsulated packets will be delivered to the tunnel
      egress.

   o  For IPv4 packets that are larger than 1500 bytes and with the DF
      bit set to 0, the tunnel ingress uses ordinary IP fragmentation to
      break the unencapsulated packet into a minimum number of non-
      overlapping fragments where the first fragment is no larger than
      1024-ENCAPS and all other fragments are no larger than the first
      fragment.  The tunnel ingress then encapsulates each fragment (and
      for IPv4 sets the DF bit to 0) then admits them into the tunnel.
      These encapsulated fragments will be delivered to the final
      destination via the tunnel egress.

   o  For all other IP packets, if the packet is too large to enter the
      underlying interface following encapsulation, the tunnel ingress
      drops the packet and returns a network-layer (L3) PTB message to
      the original source with MTU set to the larger of 1500 bytes or
      the underlying interface MTU minus ENCAPS.  Otherwise, the tunnel
      ingress encapsulates the packet and admits it into the tunnel
      without fragmentation (and for IPv4 sets the DF bit to 1) and
      translates any link-layer (L2) PTB messages it may receive from
      the network into corresponding L3 PTB messages to send to the
      original source as specified in Section 3.13.  Since both L2 and
      L3 PTB messages may be either lost or contain insufficient
      information, however, it is RECOMMENDED that original sources that
      send unfragmentable IP packets larger than 1500 bytes use
      Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery (PLPMTUD) [RFC4821].

   While sending packets according to the above algorithm, the tunnel
   ingress MAY also send 1500 byte probe packets to determine whether
   they can reach the tunnel egress without fragmentation.  If the
   probes succeed, the tunnel ingress can begin sending packets that are
   no larger than 1500 bytes without fragmentation (and for IPv4 with DF
   set to 1).  Since the path MTU within the tunnel may fluctuate due to
   routing changes, the tunnel ingress SHOULD continue to send
   additional probes subject to rate limiting and SHOULD process any L2
   PTB messages as an indication that the path MTU may have decreased.
   If the path MTU within the tunnel becomes insufficient, the source
   MUST resume fragmentation.





Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 21]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   To construct a probe, the tunnel ingress prepares an NS message with
   a Nonce option plus trailing NULL padding octets added to a length of
   1500 bytes without including the length of the padding in the IPv6
   Payload Length field, but with the length included in the
   encapsulating IP header.  The tunnel ingress then encapsulates the
   padded NS message in the encapsulation headers (and for IPv4 sets DF
   to 1) then sends the message to the tunnel egress.  If the tunnel
   egress returns a solicited NA message with a matching Nonce option,
   the tunnel ingress deems the probe successful.

   When the tunnel egress receives the fragments of a fragmented packet,
   it reassembles them into a whole packet per the reassembly algorithm
   in [RFC2460] then discards the Fragment Header.  The tunnel egress
   therefore MUST be capable of reassembling packets up to 1500+ENCAPS
   bytes in length; hence, it is RECOMMENDED that the tunnel egress be
   capable of reassembling at least 2KB.

3.12.1.  Accommodating Large IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 Messages

   IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 messages MUST be accommodated even if some
   fragmentation is necessary.  These packets are therefore accommodated
   through a modification of the second rule in the above algorithm as
   follows:

   o  For IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 messages that are larger than (1280-ENCAPS)
      bytes, the tunnel ingress encapsulates the packet and inserts a
      Fragment Header and AERO shim header above the UDP/IP
      encapsulation headers.  Next, the tunnel ingress uses the
      fragmentation algorithm in [RFC2460] to break the packet into a
      minimum number of non-overlapping fragments where the first
      fragment (including ENCAPS) is no larger than 1024 bytes and the
      remaining fragments are no larger than the first.  The tunnel
      ingress then encapsulates each fragment (and for IPv4 sets the DF
      bit to 0) then admits them into the tunnel.

   IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 messages that exceed the minimum reassembly size
   listed above rarely occur in the modern era, however the tunnel
   egress SHOULD be able to reassemble them if they do.  This means that
   the tunnel egress SHOULD include a configuration knob allowing the
   operator to set a larger reassembly buffer size if large IPv6ND and
   DHCPv6 messages become more common in the future.

   The tunnel ingress can send large IPv6 ND and DHCPv6 messages without
   fragmentation if there is assurance that large packets can traverse
   the tunnel without fragmentation.  The tunnel ingress MAY send probe
   packets of 1500 bytes or larger as specified above to determine a
   size for which fragmentation can be avoided.




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 22]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.12.2.  Integrity

   When fragmentation is needed, there must be assurance that reassembly
   can be safely conducted without incurring data corruption.  Sources
   of corruption can include implementation errors, memory errors and
   misassociation of fragments from a first datagram with fragments of
   another datagram.  The first two conditions (implementation and
   memory errors) are mitigated by modern systems and implementations
   that have demonstrated integrity through decades of operational
   practice.  The third condition (reassembly misassociations) must be
   accounted for by AERO.

   The AERO fragmentation procedure described in the above algorithms
   uses the IPv6 Fragment Header and reuses standard IPv6 fragmentation
   and reassembly code.  Since the Fragment Header includes a 32-bit ID
   field, there would need to be 2^32 packets alive in the network
   before a second packet with a duplicate ID enters the system with the
   (remote) possibility for a reassembly misassociation.  For 1280 byte
   packets, and for a maximum network lifetime value of 60
   seconds[RFC2460], this means that the tunnel ingress would need to
   produce ~(7 *10^12) bits/sec in order for a duplication event to be
   possible.  This exceeds the bandwidth of data link technologies of
   the modern era, but not necessarily so going forward into the future.
   Although typical wireless data links used by AERO Clients support
   vastly lower data rates, the aggregate data rates between AERO
   Servers and Relays may be substantial.  However, high speed data
   links in the network core are expected to configure larger MTUs,
   e.g., 4KB, 8KB or even larger.  Hence, no integrity check is included
   to cover the AERO fragmentation and reassembly procedures.

   When the tunnel ingress sends an IPv4-encapsulated packet with the DF
   bit set to 0 in the above algorithms, there is a chance that the
   packet may be fragmented by an IPv4 router somewhere within the
   tunnel.  Since the largest such packet is only 1280 bytes, however,
   it is very likely that the packet will traverse the tunnel without
   incurring a restricting link.  Even when a link within the tunnel
   configures an MTU smaller than 1280 bytes, it is very likely that it
   does so due to limited performance characteristics [RFC3819].  This
   means that the tunnel would not be able to convey fragmented
   IPv4-encapsulated packets fast enough to produce reassembly
   misassociations, as discussed above.  However, AERO must also account
   for the possibility of tunnel paths that include "poorly managed"
   IPv4 link MTUs.

   Since the IPv4 header includes only a 16-bit ID field, there would
   only need to be 2^16 packets alive in the network before a second
   packet with a duplicate ID enters the system.  For 1280 byte packets,
   and for a maximum network lifetime value of 120 seconds[RFC0791],



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 23]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   this means that the tunnel ingress would only need to produce ~(5
   *10^6) bits/sec in order for a duplication event to be possible - a
   value that is well within range for many modern wired and wireless
   data link technologies.

   Therefore, if there is strong operational assurance that no IPv4
   links capable of supporting data rates of 5Mbps or more configure an
   MTU smaller than 1280 the tunnel ingress MAY omit an integrity check
   for the IPv4 fragmentation and reassembly procedures; otherwise, the
   tunnel ingress SHOULD include an integrity check.  When an upper
   layer encapsulation (e.g., IPsec) already includes an integrity
   check, the tunnel ingress need not include an additional check.
   Otherwise, the tunnel ingress calculates the UDP checksum over the
   encapsulated packet and writes the value into the UDP encapsulation
   header, i.e., instead of writing the value 0.  The tunnel egress will
   then verify the UDP checksum and discard the packet if the checksum
   is incorrect.

3.13.  AERO Interface Error Handling

   When an AERO node admits encapsulated packets into the AERO
   interface, it may receive link-layer (L2) or network-layer (L3) error
   indications.

   An L2 error indication is an ICMP error message generated by a router
   on the path to the neighbor or by the neighbor itself.  The message
   includes an IP header with the address of the node that generated the
   error as the source address and with the link-layer address of the
   AERO node as the destination address.

   The IP header is followed by an ICMP header that includes an error
   Type, Code and Checksum.  For ICMPv6 [RFC4443], the error Types
   include "Destination Unreachable", "Packet Too Big (PTB)", "Time
   Exceeded" and "Parameter Problem".  For ICMPv4 [RFC0792], the error
   Types include "Destination Unreachable", "Fragmentation Needed" (a
   Destination Unreachable Code that is analogous to the ICMPv6 PTB),
   "Time Exceeded" and "Parameter Problem".

   The ICMP header is followed by the leading portion of the packet that
   generated the error, also known as the "packet-in-error".  For
   ICMPv6, [RFC4443] specifies that the packet-in-error includes: "As
   much of invoking packet as possible without the ICMPv6 packet
   exceeding the minimum IPv6 MTU" (i.e., no more than 1280 bytes).  For
   ICMPv4, [RFC0792] specifies that the packet-in-error includes:
   "Internet Header + 64 bits of Original Data Datagram", however
   [RFC1812] Section 4.3.2.3 updates this specification by stating: "the
   ICMP datagram SHOULD contain as much of the original datagram as




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 24]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   possible without the length of the ICMP datagram exceeding 576
   bytes".

   The L2 error message format is shown in Figure 4:

        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        ~                               ~
        |        L2 IP Header of        |
        |         error message         |
        ~                               ~
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |         L2 ICMP Header        |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ---
        ~                               ~   P
        |   IP and other encapsulation  |   a
        | headers of original L3 packet |   c
        ~                               ~   k
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   e
        ~                               ~   t
        |        IP header of           |
        |      original L3 packet       |   i
        ~                               ~   n
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        ~                               ~   e
        |    Upper layer headers and    |   r
        |    leading portion of body    |   r
        |   of the original L3 packet   |   o
        ~                               ~   r
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ---

             Figure 4: AERO Interface L2 Error Message Format

   The AERO node rules for processing these L2 error messages is as
   follows:

   o  When an AERO node receives an L2 Parameter Problem message, it
      processes the message the same as described as for ordinary ICMP
      errors in the normative references [RFC0792][RFC4443].

   o  When an AERO node receives persistent L2 IPv4 Time Exceeded
      messages, the IP ID field may be wrapping before earlier fragments
      have been processed.  In that case, the node SHOULD begin
      including IPv4 integrity checks (see: Section 3.12.2).

   o  When an AERO Client receives persistent L2 Destination Unreachable
      messages in response to tunneled packets that it sends to one of
      its dynamic neighbor correspondents, the Client SHOULD test the
      path to the correspondent using Neighbor Unreachability Detection



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 25]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


      (NUD) (see Section 3.16).  If NUD fails, the Client SHOULD set
      ForwardTime for the corresponding dynamic neighbor cache entry to
      0 and allow future packets destined to the correspondent to flow
      through a Server.

   o  When an AERO Client receives persistent L2 Destination Unreachable
      messages in response to tunneled packets that it sends to one of
      its static neighbor Servers, the Client SHOULD test the path to
      the Server using NUD.  If NUD fails, the Client SHOULD delete the
      neighbor cache entry and attempt to associate with a new Server.

   o  When an AERO Server receives persistent L2 Destination Unreachable
      messages in response to tunneled packets that it sends to one of
      its static neighbor Clients, the Server SHOULD test the path to
      the Client using NUD.  If NUD fails, the Server SHOULD cancel the
      DHCPv6 PD lease for the Client's ACP, withdraw its route for the
      ACP from the AERO routing system and delete the neighbor cache
      entry (see Section 3.16 and Section 3.17).

   o  When an AERO Relay or Server receives an L2 Destination
      Unreachable message in response to a tunneled packet that it sends
      to one of its permanent neighbors, it discards the message since
      the routing system is likely in a temporary transitional state
      that will soon re-converge.

   o  When an AERO node receives an L2 PTB message, it translates the
      message into an L3 PTB message if possible (*) and forwards the
      message toward the original source as described below.

   To translate an L2 PTB message to an L3 PTB message, the AERO node
   first caches the MTU field value of the L2 ICMP header.  The node
   next discards the L2 IP and ICMP headers, and also discards the
   encapsulation headers of the original L3 packet.  Next the node
   encapsulates the included segment of the original L3 packet in an L3
   IP and ICMP header, and sets the ICMP header Type and Code values to
   appropriate values for the L3 IP protocol.  In the process, the node
   writes the maximum of 1500 bytes and (L2 MTU - ENCAPS) into the MTU
   field of the L3 ICMP header.

   The node next writes the IP source address of the original L3 packet
   as the destination address of the L3 PTB message and determines the
   next hop to the destination.  If the next hop is reached via the AERO
   interface, the node uses the IPv6 address "::" or the IPv4 address
   "0.0.0.0" as the IP source address of the L3 PTB message.  Otherwise,
   the node uses one of its non link-local addresses as the source
   address of the L3 PTB message.  The node finally calculates the ICMP
   checksum over the L3 PTB message and writes the Checksum in the




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 26]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   corresponding field of the L3 ICMP header.  The L3 PTB message
   therefore is formatted as follows:

        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        ~                               ~
        |        L3 IP Header of        |
        |         error message         |
        ~                               ~
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |         L3 ICMP Header        |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  ---
        ~                               ~   p
        |        IP header of           |   k
        |      original L3 packet       |   t
        ~                               ~
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   i
        ~                               ~   n
        |    Upper layer headers and    |
        |    leading portion of body    |   e
        |   of the original L3 packet   |   r
        ~                               ~   r
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ---

             Figure 5: AERO Interface L3 Error Message Format

   After the node has prepared the L3 PTB message, it either forwards
   the message via a link outside of the AERO interface without
   encapsulation, or encapsulates and forwards the message to the next
   hop via the AERO interface.

   When an AERO Relay receives an L3 packet for which the destination
   address is covered by an ASP, if there is no more-specific routing
   information for the destination the Relay drops the packet and
   returns an L3 Destination Unreachable message.  The Relay first
   writes the IP source address of the original L3 packet as the
   destination address of the L3 Destination Unreachable message and
   determines the next hop to the destination.  If the next hop is
   reached via the AERO interface, the Relay uses the IPv6 address "::"
   or the IPv4 address "0.0.0.0" as the IP source address of the L3
   Destination Unreachable message and forwards the message to the next
   hop within the AERO interface.  Otherwise, the Relay uses one of its
   non link-local addresses as the source address of the L3 Destination
   Unreachable message and forwards the message via a link outside the
   AERO interface.

   When an AERO node receives any L3 error message via the AERO
   interface, it examines the destination address in the L3 IP header of
   the message.  If the next hop toward the destination address of the



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 27]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   error message is via the AERO interface, the node re-encapsulates and
   forwards the message to the next hop within the AERO interface.
   Otherwise, if the source address in the L3 IP header of the message
   is the IPv6 address "::" or the IPv4 address "0.0.0.0", the node
   writes one of its non link-local addresses as the source address of
   the L3 message and recalculates the IP and/or ICMP checksums.  The
   node finally forwards the message via a link outside of the AERO
   interface.

   (*) Note that in some instances the packet-in-error field of an L2
   PTB message may not include enough information for translation to an
   L3 PTB message.  In that case, the AERO interface simply discards the
   L2 PTB message.  It can therefore be said that translation of L2 PTB
   messages to L3 PTB messages can provide a useful optimization when
   possible, but is not critical for sources that correctly use PLPMTUD.

3.14.  AERO Router Discovery, Prefix Delegation and Address
       Configuration

3.14.1.  AERO DHCPv6 Service Model

   Each AERO Server configures a DHCPv6 server function to facilitate PD
   requests from Clients.  Each Server is pre-configured with an
   identical list of ACP-to-Client ID mappings for all Clients enrolled
   in the AERO system, as well as any information necessary to
   authenticate Clients.  The configuration information is maintained by
   a central administrative authority for the AERO link and securely
   propagated to all Servers whenever a new Client is enrolled or an
   existing Client is withdrawn.

   With these identical configurations, each Server can function
   independently of all other Servers, including the maintenance of
   active leases.  Therefore, no Server-to-Server DHCPv6 state
   synchronization is necessary, and Clients can optionally hold
   separate leases for the same ACP from multiple Servers.

   In this way, Clients can easily associate with multiple Servers, and
   can receive new leases from new Servers before deprecating leases
   held through old Servers.  This enables a graceful "make-before-
   break" capability.

3.14.2.  AERO Client Behavior

   AERO Clients discover the link-layer addresses of AERO Servers via
   static configuration, or through an automated means such as DNS name
   resolution.  In the absence of other information, the Client resolves
   the FQDN "linkupnetworks.[domainname]" where "linkupnetworks" is a
   constant text string and "[domainname]" is the connection-specific



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 28]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   DNS suffix for the Client's underlying network connection (e.g.,
   "example.com").  After discovering the link-layer addresses, the
   Client associates with one or more of the corresponding Servers.

   To associate with a Server, the Client acts as a requesting router to
   request an ACP through a DHCPv6 PD exchange[RFC3315][RFC3633] in
   which the Client's Solicit/Request messages use the IPv6
   "unspecified" address (i.e., "::") as the IPv6 source address,
   'All_DHCP_Relay_Agents_and_Servers' as the IPv6 destination address
   and the link-layer address of the Server as the link-layer
   destination address.  The Client also includes a Client Identifier
   option with a DHCP Unique Identifier (DUID) plus any necessary
   authentication options to identify itself to the DHCPv6 server, and
   includes a Client Link Layer Address Option (CLLAO) [RFC6939] with
   the format shown in Figure 6:

        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_CLIENT_LINKLAYER_ADDR  |           option-length       |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |   link-layer type (16 bits)   |    Link ID    |   Preference  |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Figure 6: AERO Client Link-Layer Address Option (CLLAO) Format

   The Client sets the CLLAO 'option-length' field to 4 and sets the
   'link-layer type' field to TBD1 (see: IANA Considerations), then
   includes appropriate Link ID and Preference values for the underlying
   interface over which the Solicit/Request will be issued (note that
   these are the same values that would be included in a TLLAO as shown
   in Figure 2).  If the Client is pre-provisioned with an ACP
   associated with the AERO service, it MAY also include the ACP in the
   Solicit/Request message Identity Association (IA) option to indicate
   its preferred ACP to the DHCPv6 server.  The Client then sends the
   encapsulated DHCPv6 request via the underlying interface.

   When the Client receives its ACP and the set of ASPs via a DHCPv6
   Reply from the AERO Server, it creates a static neighbor cache entry
   with the Server's link-local address as the network-layer address and
   the Server's encapsulation address as the link-layer address.  The
   Client then records the lifetime for the ACP in the neighbor cache
   entry and marks the neighbor cache entry as "default", i.e., the
   Client considers the Server as a default router.  (Note that the AERO
   Server and default router functions can be separated such that the
   control plane and data plane can be maintained on different platforms
   if desired.)  If the Reply message contains a Vendor-Specific




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 29]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   Information Option (see: Section 3.14.3) the Client also caches each
   ASP in the option.

   The Client then applies the AERO address to the AERO interface and
   sub-delegates the ACP to nodes and links within its attached EUNs
   (the AERO address thereafter remains stable as the Client moves).
   The Client also assigns a default IP route to the AERO interface as a
   route-to-interface, i.e., with no explicit next-hop.  The next hop
   will then be determined after a packet has been submitted to the AERO
   interface by inspecting the neighbor cache (see above).

   On some platforms (e.g., popular cell phone operating systems), the
   act of assigning a default IPv6 route may not be permitted from a
   user application due to security policy.  Typically, those platforms
   include a TUN/TAP interface that acts as a point-to-point conduit
   between user applications and the AERO interface.  In that case, the
   Client can instead generate a "synthesized RA" message.  The message
   conforms to [RFC4861] and is prepared as follows:

   o  the IPv6 source address is fe80::

   o  the IPv6 destination address is all-nodes multicast

   o  the Router Lifetime is set to a time that is no longer than the
      ACP DHCPv6 lifetime

   o  the message does not include a Source Link Layer Address Option
      (SLLAO)

   o  the message includes a Prefix Information Option (PIO) with a /64
      prefix taken from the ACP as the prefix for autoconfiguration

   The Client then sends the synthesized RA message via the TUN/TAP
   interface, where the operating system kernel will interpret it as
   though it were generated by an actual router.  The operating system
   will then install a default route and use StateLess Address
   AutoConfiguration (SLAAC) to configure an IPv6 address on the TUN/TAP
   interface.  Methods for similarly installing an IPv4 default route
   and IPv4 address on the TUN/TAP interface are based on synthesized
   DHCPv4 messages [RFC2131].  Note that in this method, the Client
   appears as a mobility proxy for applications that bind to the (point-
   to-point) TUN/TAP interface.  The arrangement can be likened to a
   Proxy AERO scenario in which the mobile node and Client are located
   within the same physical platform (see Section 3.22 for further
   details on Proxy AERO).

   The Client subsequently renews its ACP delegation through each of its
   Servers by performing DHCPv6 Renew/Reply exchanges with its AERO



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 30]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   address as the IPv6 source address,
   'All_DHCP_Relay_Agents_and_Servers' as the IPv6 destination address,
   the link-layer address of a Server as the link-layer destination
   address and the same Client identifier, authentication options and
   CLLAO option as was used in the initial PD request.  Note that if the
   Client does not issue a DHCPv6 Renew before the Server has terminated
   the lease (e.g., if the Client has been out of touch with the Server
   for a considerable amount of time), the Server's Reply will report
   NoBinding and the Client must re-initiate the DHCPv6 PD procedure.
   If the Client sends synthesized RA and/or DHCPv4 messages (see
   above), it also sends a new synthesized message when issuing a DHCPv6
   Renew or when re-initiating the DHCPv6 PD procedure.

   Since the Client's AERO address is configured from the unique ACP
   delegation it receives, there is no need for Duplicate Address
   Detection (DAD) on AERO links.  Other nodes maliciously attempting to
   hijack an authorized Client's AERO address will be denied access to
   the network by the DHCPv6 server due to an unacceptable link-layer
   address and/or security parameters (see: Security Considerations).

   AERO Clients ignore the IP address and UDP port number in any S/TLLAO
   options in ND messages they receive directly from another AERO
   Client, but examine the Link ID and Preference values to match the
   message with the correct link-layer address information.

3.14.3.  AERO Server Behavior

   AERO Servers configure a DHCPv6 server function on their AERO links.
   AERO Servers arrange to add their encapsulation layer IP addresses
   (i.e., their link-layer addresses) to the DNS resource records for
   the FQDN "linkupnetworks.[domainname]" before entering service.

   When an AERO Server receives a prospective Client's DHCPv6 PD
   Solicit/Request message, it first authenticates the message.  If
   authentication succeeds, the Server determines the correct ACP to
   delegate to the Client by matching the Client's DUID within an online
   directory service (e.g., LDAP).  The Server then delegates the ACP
   and creates a static neighbor cache entry for the Client's AERO
   address with lifetime set to no more than the lease lifetime and the
   Client's link-layer address as the link-layer address for the Link ID
   specified in the CLLAO option.  The Server then creates an IP
   forwarding table entry so that the AERO routing system will propagate
   the ACP to all Relays (see: Section 3.7).  Finally, the Server sends
   a DHCPv6 Reply message to the Client while using fe80::ID as the IPv6
   source address, the Client's AERO address as the IPv6 destination
   address, and the Client's link-layer address as the destination link-
   layer address.  The Server also includes a Server Unicast option with




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 31]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   server-address set to fe80::ID so that all future Client/Server
   transactions will be link-local-only unicast over the AERO link.

   When the Server sends the DHCPv6 Reply message, it also includes a
   DHCPv6 Vendor-Specific Information Option with 'enterprise-number'
   set to "TBD2" (see: IANA Considerations).  The option is formatted as
   shown in[RFC3315] and with the AERO enterprise-specific format shown
   in Figure 7:

        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_VENDOR_OPTS       |           option-len          |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                   enterprise-number ("TBD2")                  |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                      Reserved                 | Prefix Length |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       +                            ASP (1)                            +
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                      Reserved                 | Prefix Length |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       +                             ASP (2)                           +
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                      Reserved                 | Prefix Length |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       +                             ASP (3)                           +
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       .                             (etc.)                            .
       .                                                               .
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

             Figure 7: AERO Vendor-Specific Information Option

   Per Figure 7, the option includes one or more ASP.  The ASP field
   contains the IP prefix as it would appear in the interface identifier
   portion of the corresponding AERO address (see: Section 3.3).  For
   IPv6, valid values for the Prefix Length field are 0 through 64; for
   IPv4, valid values are 0 through 32.

   After the initial DHCPv6 PD exchange, the AERO Server maintains the
   neighbor cache entry for the Client until the lease lifetime expires.
   If the Client issues a Renew/Reply exchange, the Server extends the



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 32]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   lifetime.  If the Client issues a Release/Reply, or if the Client
   does not issue a Renew/Reply before the lifetime expires, the Server
   deletes the neighbor cache entry for the Client and withdraws the IP
   route from the AERO routing system.

3.15.  AERO Intradomain Route Optimization

   When a source Client forwards packets to a prospective correspondent
   Client within the same AERO link domain (i.e., one for which the
   packet's destination address is covered by an ASP), the source Client
   initiates an intra-domain AERO route optimization procedure.  The
   procedure is based on an exchange of IPv6 ND messages using a chain
   of AERO Servers and Relays as a trust basis.  This procedure is in
   contrast to the Return Routability procedure required for route
   optimization to a correspondent Client located in the Internet as
   described in Section 3.24.  The following sections specify the AERO
   intradomain route optimization procedure.

3.15.1.  Reference Operational Scenario

   Figure 8 depicts the AERO intradomain route optimization reference
   operational scenario, using IPv6 addressing as the example (while not
   shown, a corresponding example for IPv4 addressing can be easily
   constructed).  The figure shows an AERO Relay ('R1'), two AERO
   Servers ('S1', 'S2'), two AERO Clients ('C1', 'C2') and two ordinary
   IPv6 hosts ('H1', 'H2'):

























Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 33]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


            +--------------+  +--------------+  +--------------+
            |   Server S1  |  |    Relay R1  |  |   Server S2  |
            +--------------+  +--------------+  +--------------+
                fe80::2            fe80::1           fe80::3
                 L2(S1)             L2(R1)            L2(S2)
                   |                  |                 |
       X-----+-----+------------------+-----------------+----+----X
             |       AERO Link                               |
            L2(A)                                          L2(B)
     fe80::2001:db8:0:0                              fe80::2001:db8:1:0
     +--------------+                                 +--------------+
     |AERO Client C1|                                 |AERO Client C2|
     +--------------+                                 +--------------+
     2001:DB8:0::/48                                  2001:DB8:1::/48
             |                                                |
            .-.                                              .-.
         ,-(  _)-.   2001:db8:0::1      2001:db8:1::1     ,-(  _)-.
      .-(_  IP   )-.   +---------+      +---------+    .-(_  IP   )-.
    (__    EUN      )--| Host H1 |      | Host H2 |--(__    EUN      )
       `-(______)-'    +---------+      +---------+     `-(______)-'

               Figure 8: AERO Reference Operational Scenario

   In Figure 8, Relay ('R1') assigns the address fe80::1 to its AERO
   interface with link-layer address L2(R1), Server ('S1') assigns the
   address fe80::2 with link-layer address L2(S1),and Server ('S2')
   assigns the address fe80::3 with link-layer address L2(S2).  Servers
   ('S1') and ('S2') next arrange to add their link-layer addresses to a
   published list of valid Servers for the AERO link.

   AERO Client ('C1') receives the ACP 2001:db8:0::/48 in a DHCPv6 PD
   exchange via AERO Server ('S1') then assigns the address
   fe80::2001:db8:0:0 to its AERO interface with link-layer address
   L2(C1).  Client ('C1') configures a default route and neighbor cache
   entry via the AERO interface with next-hop address fe80::2 and link-
   layer address L2(S1), then sub-delegates the ACP to its attached
   EUNs.  IPv6 host ('H1') connects to the EUN, and configures the
   address 2001:db8:0::1.

   AERO Client ('C2') receives the ACP 2001:db8:1::/48 in a DHCPv6 PD
   exchange via AERO Server ('S2') then assigns the address
   fe80::2001:db8:1:0 to its AERO interface with link-layer address
   L2(C2).  Client ('C2') configures a default route and neighbor cache
   entry via the AERO interface with next-hop address fe80::3 and link-
   layer address L2(S2), then sub-delegates the ACP to its attached
   EUNs.  IPv6 host ('H1') connects to the EUN, and configures the
   address 2001:db8:1::1.




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 34]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.15.2.  Concept of Operations

   Again, with reference to Figure 8, when source host ('H1') sends a
   packet to destination host ('H2'), the packet is first forwarded over
   the source host's attached EUN to Client ('C1').  Client ('C1') then
   forwards the packet via its AERO interface to Server ('S1') and also
   sends a Predirect message toward Client ('C2') via Server ('S1').
   Server ('S1') then re-encapsulates and forwards both the packet and
   the Predirect message out the same AERO interface toward Client
   ('C2') via Relay ('R1').

   When Relay ('R1') receives the packet and Predirect message, it
   consults its forwarding table to discover Server ('S2') as the next
   hop toward Client ('C2').  Relay ('R1') then forwards both the packet
   and the Predirect message to Server ('S2'), which then forwards them
   to Client ('C2').

   After Client ('C2') receives the Predirect message, it process the
   message and returns a Redirect message toward Client ('C1') via
   Server ('S2').  During the process, Client ('C2') also creates or
   updates a dynamic neighbor cache entry for Client ('C1').

   When Server ('S2') receives the Redirect message, it re-encapsulates
   the message and forwards it on to Relay ('R1'), which forwards the
   message on to Server ('S1') which forwards the message on to Client
   ('C1').  After Client ('C1') receives the Redirect message, it
   processes the message and creates or updates a dynamic neighbor cache
   entry for Client ('C2').

   Following the above Predirect/Redirect message exchange, forwarding
   of packets from Client ('C1') to Client ('C2') without involving any
   intermediate nodes is enabled.  The mechanisms that support this
   exchange are specified in the following sections.

3.15.3.  Message Format

   AERO Redirect/Predirect messages use the same format as for ICMPv6
   Redirect messages depicted in Section 4.5 of [RFC4861], but also
   include a new "Prefix Length" field taken from the low-order 8 bits
   of the Redirect message Reserved field.  For IPv6, valid values for
   the Prefix Length field are 0 through 64; for IPv4, valid values are
   0 through 32.  The Redirect/Predirect messages are formatted as shown
   in Figure 9:








Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 35]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


        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 (=137)  |  Code (=0/1)  |          Checksum             |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                   Reserved                    | Prefix Length |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       +                                                               +
       |                                                               |
       +                       Target Address                          +
       |                                                               |
       +                                                               +
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |                                                               |
       +                                                               +
       |                                                               |
       +                     Destination Address                       +
       |                                                               |
       +                                                               +
       |                                                               |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |   Options ...
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

             Figure 9: AERO Redirect/Predirect Message Format

3.15.4.  Sending Predirects

   When a Client forwards a packet with a source address from one of its
   ACPs toward a destination address covered by an ASP (i.e., toward
   another AERO Client connected to the same AERO link), the source
   Client MAY send a Predirect message forward toward the destination
   Client via the Server.

   In the reference operational scenario, when Client ('C1') forwards a
   packet toward Client ('C2'), it MAY also send a Predirect message
   forward toward Client ('C2'), subject to rate limiting (see
   Section 8.2 of [RFC4861]).  Client ('C1') prepares the Predirect
   message as follows:

   o  the link-layer source address is set to 'L2(C1)' (i.e., the link-
      layer address of Client ('C1')).

   o  the link-layer destination address is set to 'L2(S1)' (i.e., the
      link-layer address of Server ('S1')).




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 36]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   o  the network-layer source address is set to fe80::2001:db8:0:0
      (i.e., the AERO address of Client ('C1')).

   o  the network-layer destination address is set to fe80::2001:db8:1:0
      (i.e., the AERO address of Client ('C2')).

   o  the Type is set to 137.

   o  the Code is set to 1 to indicate "Predirect".

   o  the Prefix Length is set to the length of the prefix to be
      assigned to the Target Address.

   o  the Target Address is set to fe80::2001:db8:0:0 (i.e., the AERO
      address of Client ('C1')).

   o  the Destination Address is set to the source address of the
      originating packet that triggered the Predirection event.  (If the
      originating packet is an IPv4 packet, the address is constructed
      in IPv4-compatible IPv6 address format).

   o  the message includes one or more TLLAOs with Link ID and
      Preference set to appropriate values for Client ('C1')'s
      underlying interfaces, and with UDP Port Number and IP Address set
      to 0'.

   o  the message SHOULD include a Timestamp option and a Nonce option.

   o  the message includes a Redirected Header Option (RHO) that
      contains the originating packet truncated if necessary to ensure
      that at least the network-layer header is included but the size of
      the message does not exceed 1280 bytes.

   Note that the act of sending Predirect messages is cited as "MAY",
   since Client ('C1') may have advanced knowledge that the direct path
   to Client ('C2') would be unusable or otherwise undesirable.  If the
   direct path later becomes unusable after the initial route
   optimization, Client ('C1') simply allows packets to again flow
   through Server ('S1').

3.15.5.  Re-encapsulating and Relaying Predirects

   When Server ('S1') receives a Predirect message from Client ('C1'),
   it first verifies that the TLLAOs in the Predirect are a proper
   subset of the Link IDs in Client ('C1')'s neighbor cache entry.  If
   the Client's TLLAOs are not acceptable, Server ('S1') discards the
   message.  Otherwise, Server ('S1') validates the message according to
   the ICMPv6 Redirect message validation rules in Section 8.1 of



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 37]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   [RFC4861], except that the Predirect has Code=1.  Server ('S1') also
   verifies that Client ('C1') is authorized to use the Prefix Length in
   the Predirect when applied to the AERO address in the network-layer
   source address by searching for the AERO address in the neighbor
   cache.  If validation fails, Server ('S1') discards the Predirect;
   otherwise, it copies the correct UDP Port numbers and IP Addresses
   for Client ('C1')'s links into the (previously empty) TLLAOs.

   Server ('S1') then examines the network-layer destination address of
   the Predirect to determine the next hop toward Client ('C2') by
   searching for the AERO address in the neighbor cache.  Since Client
   ('C2') is not one of its neighbors, Server ('S1') re-encapsulates the
   Predirect and relays it via Relay ('R1') by changing the link-layer
   source address of the message to 'L2(S1)' and changing the link-layer
   destination address to 'L2(R1)'.  Server ('S1') finally forwards the
   re-encapsulated message to Relay ('R1') without decrementing the
   network-layer TTL/Hop Limit field.

   When Relay ('R1') receives the Predirect message from Server ('S1')
   it determines that Server ('S2') is the next hop toward Client ('C2')
   by consulting its forwarding table.  Relay ('R1') then re-
   encapsulates the Predirect while changing the link-layer source
   address to 'L2(R1)' and changing the link-layer destination address
   to 'L2(S2)'.  Relay ('R1') then relays the Predirect via Server
   ('S2').

   When Server ('S2') receives the Predirect message from Relay ('R1')
   it determines that Client ('C2') is a neighbor by consulting its
   neighbor cache.  Server ('S2') then re-encapsulates the Predirect
   while changing the link-layer source address to 'L2(S2)' and changing
   the link-layer destination address to 'L2(C2)'.  Server ('S2') then
   forwards the message to Client ('C2').

3.15.6.  Processing Predirects and Sending Redirects

   When Client ('C2') receives the Predirect message, it accepts the
   Predirect only if the message has a link-layer source address of one
   of its Servers (e.g., L2(S2)).  Client ('C2') further accepts the
   message only if it is willing to serve as a redirection target.
   Next, Client ('C2') validates the message according to the ICMPv6
   Redirect message validation rules in Section 8.1 of [RFC4861], except
   that it accepts the message even though Code=1 and even though the
   network-layer source address is not that of it's current first-hop
   router.

   In the reference operational scenario, when Client ('C2') receives a
   valid Predirect message, it either creates or updates a dynamic
   neighbor cache entry that stores the Target Address of the message as



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 38]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   the network-layer address of Client ('C1') , stores the link-layer
   addresses found in the TLLAOs as the link-layer addresses of Client
   ('C1') and stores the Prefix Length as the length to be applied to
   the network-layer address for forwarding purposes.  Client ('C2')
   then sets AcceptTime for the neighbor cache entry to ACCEPT_TIME.

   After processing the message, Client ('C2') prepares a Redirect
   message response as follows:

   o  the link-layer source address is set to 'L2(C2)' (i.e., the link-
      layer address of Client ('C2')).

   o  the link-layer destination address is set to 'L2(S2)' (i.e., the
      link-layer address of Server ('S2')).

   o  the network-layer source address is set to fe80::2001:db8:1:0
      (i.e., the AERO address of Client ('C2')).

   o  the network-layer destination address is set to fe80::2001:db8:0:0
      (i.e., the AERO address of Client ('C1')).

   o  the Type is set to 137.

   o  the Code is set to 0 to indicate "Redirect".

   o  the Prefix Length is set to the length of the prefix to be applied
      to the Target Address.

   o  the Target Address is set to fe80::2001:db8:1:0 (i.e., the AERO
      address of Client ('C2')).

   o  the Destination Address is set to the destination address of the
      originating packet that triggered the Redirection event.  (If the
      originating packet is an IPv4 packet, the address is constructed
      in IPv4-compatible IPv6 address format).

   o  the message includes one or more TLLAOs with Link ID and
      Preference set to appropriate values for Client ('C2')'s
      underlying interfaces, and with UDP Port Number and IP Address set
      to '0'.

   o  the message SHOULD include a Timestamp option and MUST echo the
      Nonce option received in the Predirect (i.e., if a Nonce option is
      included).

   o  the message includes as much of the RHO copied from the
      corresponding AERO Predirect message as possible such that at




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 39]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


      least the network-layer header is included but the size of the
      message does not exceed 1280 bytes.

   After Client ('C2') prepares the Redirect message, it sends the
   message to Server ('S2').

3.15.7.  Re-encapsulating and Relaying Redirects

   When Server ('S2') receives a Redirect message from Client ('C2'), it
   first verifies that the TLLAOs in the Redirect are a proper subset of
   the Link IDs in Client ('C2')'s neighbor cache entry.  If the
   Client's TLLAOs are not acceptable, Server ('S2') discards the
   message.  Otherwise, Server ('S2') validates the message according to
   the ICMPv6 Redirect message validation rules in Section 8.1 of
   [RFC4861].  Server ('S2') also verifies that Client ('C2') is
   authorized to use the Prefix Length in the Redirect when applied to
   the AERO address in the network-layer source address by searching for
   the AERO address in the neighbor cache.  If validation fails, Server
   ('S2') discards the Predirect; otherwise, it copies the correct UDP
   Port numbers and IP Addresses for Client ('C2')'s links into the
   (previously empty) TLLAOs.

   Server ('S2') then examines the network-layer destination address of
   the Predirect to determine the next hop toward Client ('C2') by
   searching for the AERO address in the neighbor cache.  Since Client
   ('C2') is not a neighbor, Server ('S2') re-encapsulates the Predirect
   and relays it via Relay ('R1') by changing the link-layer source
   address of the message to 'L2(S2)' and changing the link-layer
   destination address to 'L2(R1)'.  Server ('S2') finally forwards the
   re-encapsulated message to Relay ('R1') without decrementing the
   network-layer TTL/Hop Limit field.

   When Relay ('R1') receives the Predirect message from Server ('S2')
   it determines that Server ('S1') is the next hop toward Client ('C1')
   by consulting its forwarding table.  Relay ('R1') then re-
   encapsulates the Predirect while changing the link-layer source
   address to 'L2(R1)' and changing the link-layer destination address
   to 'L2(S1)'.  Relay ('R1') then relays the Predirect via Server
   ('S1').

   When Server ('S1') receives the Predirect message from Relay ('R1')
   it determines that Client ('C1') is a neighbor by consulting its
   neighbor cache.  Server ('S1') then re-encapsulates the Predirect
   while changing the link-layer source address to 'L2(S1)' and changing
   the link-layer destination address to 'L2(C1)'.  Server ('S1') then
   forwards the message to Client ('C1').





Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 40]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.15.8.  Processing Redirects

   When Client ('C1') receives the Redirect message, it accepts the
   message only if it has a link-layer source address of one of its
   Servers (e.g., ''L2(S1)').  Next, Client ('C1') validates the message
   according to the ICMPv6 Redirect message validation rules in
   Section 8.1 of [RFC4861], except that it accepts the message even
   though the network-layer source address is not that of it's current
   first-hop router.  Following validation, Client ('C1') then processes
   the message as follows.

   In the reference operational scenario, when Client ('C1') receives
   the Redirect message, it either creates or updates a dynamic neighbor
   cache entry that stores the Target Address of the message as the
   network-layer address of Client ('C2'), stores the link-layer
   addresses found in the TLLAOs as the link-layer addresses of Client
   ('C2') and stores the Prefix Length as the length to be applied to
   the network-layer address for forwarding purposes.  Client ('C1')
   then sets ForwardTime for the neighbor cache entry to FORWARD_TIME.

   Now, Client ('C1') has a neighbor cache entry with a valid
   ForwardTime value, while Client ('C2') has a neighbor cache entry
   with a valid AcceptTime value.  Thereafter, Client ('C1') may forward
   ordinary network-layer data packets directly to Client ('C2') without
   involving any intermediate nodes, and Client ('C2') can verify that
   the packets came from an acceptable source.  (In order for Client
   ('C2') to forward packets to Client ('C1'), a corresponding
   Predirect/Redirect message exchange is required in the reverse
   direction; hence, the mechanism is asymmetric.)

3.15.9.  Server-Oriented Redirection

   In some environments, the Server nearest the target Client may need
   to serve as the redirection target, e.g., if direct Client-to-Client
   communications are not possible.  In that case, the Server prepares
   the Redirect message the same as if it were the destination Client
   (see: Section 3.15.6), except that it writes its own link-layer
   address in the TLLAO option.  The Server must then maintain a dynamic
   neighbor cache entry for the redirected source Client.

3.16.  Neighbor Unreachability Detection (NUD)

   AERO nodes perform Neighbor Unreachability Detection (NUD) by sending
   unicast NS messages to elicit solicited NA messages from neighbors
   the same as described in [RFC4861].  NUD is performed either
   reactively in response to persistent L2 errors (see Section 3.13) or
   proactively to refresh existing neighbor cache entries.




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 41]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   When an AERO node sends an NS/NA message, it MUST use its link-local
   address as the IPv6 source address and the link-local address of the
   neighbor as the IPv6 destination address.  When an AERO node receives
   an NS message or a solicited NA message, it accepts the message if it
   has a neighbor cache entry for the neighbor; otherwise, it ignores
   the message.

   When a source Client is redirected to a target Client it SHOULD
   proactively test the direct path by sending an initial NS message to
   elicit a solicited NA response.  While testing the path, the source
   Client can optionally continue sending packets via the Server,
   maintain a small queue of packets until target reachability is
   confirmed, or (optimistically) allow packets to flow directly to the
   target.  The source Client SHOULD thereafter continue to proactively
   test the direct path to the target Client (see Section 7.3 of
   [RFC4861]) periodically in order to keep dynamic neighbor cache
   entries alive.

   In particular, while the source Client is actively sending packets to
   the target Client it SHOULD also send NS messages separated by
   RETRANS_TIMER milliseconds in order to receive solicited NA messages.
   If the source Client is unable to elicit a solicited NA response from
   the target Client after MAX_RETRY attempts, it SHOULD set ForwardTime
   to 0 and resume sending packets via one of its Servers.  Otherwise,
   the source Client considers the path usable and SHOULD thereafter
   process any link-layer errors as a hint that the direct path to the
   target Client has either failed or has become intermittent.

   When a target Client receives an NS message from a source Client, it
   resets AcceptTime to ACCEPT_TIME if a neighbor cache entry exists;
   otherwise, it discards the NS message.  If ForwardTime is non-zero,
   the target Client then sends a solicited NA message to the link-layer
   address of the source Client; otherwise, it sends the solicited NA
   message to the link-layer address of one of its Servers.

   When a source Client receives a solicited NA message from a target
   Client, it resets ForwardTime to FORWARD_TIME if a neighbor cache
   entry exists; otherwise, it discards the NA message.

   When ForwardTime for a dynamic neighbor cache entry expires, the
   source Client resumes sending any subsequent packets via a Server and
   may (eventually) attempt to re-initiate the AERO redirection process.
   When AcceptTime for a dynamic neighbor cache entry expires, the
   target Client discards any subsequent packets received directly from
   the source Client.  When both ForwardTime and AcceptTime for a
   dynamic neighbor cache entry expire, the Client deletes the neighbor
   cache entry.




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 42]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.17.  Mobility Management

3.17.1.  Announcing Link-Layer Address Changes

   When a Client needs to change its link-layer address, e.g., due to a
   mobility event, it performs an immediate DHCPv6 Rebind/Reply exchange
   via each of its Servers using the new link-layer address as the
   source and with a CLLAO that includes the correct Link ID and
   Preference values.  If authentication succeeds, the Server then
   update its neighbor cache and sends a DHCPv6 Reply.  Note that if the
   Client does not issue a DHCPv6 Rebind before the lease lifetime
   expires (e.g., if the Client has been out of touch with the Server
   for a considerable amount of time), the Server's Reply will report
   NoBinding and the Client must re-initiate the DHCPv6 PD procedure.

   Next, the Client sends unsolicited NA messages to each of its
   correspondent Client neighbors using the same procedures as specified
   in Section 7.2.6 of [RFC4861], except that it sends the messages as
   unicast to each neighbor via a Server instead of multicast.  In this
   process, the Client should send no more than
   MAX_NEIGHBOR_ADVERTISEMENT messages separated by no less than
   RETRANS_TIMER seconds to each neighbor.

   With reference to Figure 8, when Client ('C2') needs to change its
   link-layer address it sends unicast unsolicited NA messages to Client
   ('C1') via Server ('S2') as follows:

   o  the link-layer source address is set to 'L2(C2)' (i.e., the link-
      layer address of Client ('C2')).

   o  the link-layer destination address is set to 'L2(S2)' (i.e., the
      link-layer address of Server ('S2')).

   o  the network-layer source address is set to fe80::2001:db8:1:0
      (i.e., the AERO address of Client ('C2')).

   o  the network-layer destination address is set to fe80::2001:db8:0:0
      (i.e., the AERO address of Client ('C1')).

   o  the Type is set to 136.

   o  the Code is set to 0.

   o  the Solicited flag is set to 0.

   o  the Override flag is set to 1.





Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 43]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   o  the Target Address is set to fe80::2001:db8:1:0 (i.e., the AERO
      address of Client ('C2')).

   o  the message includes one or more TLLAOs with Link ID and
      Preference set to appropriate values for Client ('C2')'s
      underlying interfaces, and with UDP Port Number and IP Address set
      to '0'.

   o  the message SHOULD include a Timestamp option.

   When Server ('S1') receives the NA message, it relays the message in
   the same way as described for relaying Redirect messages in
   Section 3.15.7.  In particular, Server ('S1') copies the correct UDP
   port numbers and IP addresses into the TLLAOs, changes the link-layer
   source address to its own address, changes the link-layer destination
   address to the address of Relay ('R1'), then forwards the NA message
   via the relaying chain the same as for a Redirect.

   When Client ('C1') receives the NA message, it accepts the message
   only if it already has a neighbor cache entry for Client ('C2') then
   updates the link-layer addresses for Client ('C2') based on the
   addresses in the TLLAOs.  Next, Client ('C1') SHOULD initiate the NUD
   procedures specified in Section 3.16 to provide Client ('C2') with an
   indication that the link-layer source address has been updated, and
   to refresh ('C2')'s AcceptTime and ('C1')'s ForwardTime timers.

   If Client ('C2') receives an NS message from Client ('C1') indicating
   that an unsolicited NA has updated its neighbor cache, Client ('C2')
   need not send additional unsolicited NAs.  If Client ('C2')'s
   unsolicited NA messages are somehow lost, however, Client ('C1') will
   soon learn of the mobility event via NUD.

3.17.2.  Bringing New Links Into Service

   When a Client needs to bring a new underlying interface into service
   (e.g., when it activates a new data link), it performs an immediate
   Rebind/Reply exchange via each of its Servers using the new link-
   layer address as the source address and with a CLLAO that includes
   the new Link ID and Preference values.  If authentication succeeds,
   the Server then updates its neighbor cache and sends a DHCPv6 Reply.
   The Client MAY then send unsolicited NA messages to each of its
   correspondent Clients to inform them of the new link-layer address as
   described in Section 3.17.1.








Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 44]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.17.3.  Removing Existing Links from Service

   When a Client needs to remove an existing underlying interface from
   service (e.g., when it de-activates an existing data link), it
   performs an immediate Rebind/Reply exchange via each of its Servers
   over any available link with a CLLAO that includes the deprecated
   Link ID and a Preference value of 0.  If authentication succeeds, the
   Server then updates its neighbor cache and sends a DHCPv6 Reply.  The
   Client SHOULD then send unsolicited NA messages to each of its
   correspondent Clients to inform them of the deprecated link-layer
   address as described in Section 3.17.1.

3.17.4.  Moving to a New Server

   When a Client associates with a new Server, it performs the Client
   procedures specified in Section 3.14.2.

   When a Client disassociates with an existing Server, it sends a
   DHCPv6 Release message via a new Server to the unicast link-local
   network layer address of the old Server.  The new Server then writes
   its own link-layer address in the DHCPv6 release message IP source
   address and forwards the message to the old Server.

   When the old Server receives the DHCPv6 Release, it first
   authenticates the message.  The Server then resets the Client's
   neighbor cache entry lifetime to 5 seconds, rewrites the link-layer
   address in the neighbor cache entry to the address of the new Server,
   then returns a DHCPv6 Reply message to the Client via the old Server.
   When the lifetime expires, the old Server withdraws the IP route from
   the AERO routing system and deletes the neighbor cache entry for the
   Client.  The Client can then use the Reply message to verify that the
   termination signal has been processed, and can delete both the
   default route and the neighbor cache entry for the old Server.  (Note
   that since Release/Reply messages may be lost in the network the
   Client MUST retry until it gets Reply indicating that the Release was
   successful.)

   Clients SHOULD NOT move rapidly between Servers in order to avoid
   causing excessive oscillations in the AERO routing system.  Such
   oscillations could result in intermittent reachability for the Client
   itself, while causing little harm to the network.  Examples of when a
   Client might wish to change to a different Server include a Server
   that has gone unreachable, topological movements of significant
   distance, etc.







Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 45]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.18.  Encapsulation Protocol Version Considerations

   A source Client may connect only to an IPvX underlying network, while
   the target Client connects only to an IPvY underlying network.  In
   that case, the target and source Clients have no means for reaching
   each other directly (since they connect to underlying networks of
   different IP protocol versions) and so must ignore any redirection
   messages and continue to send packets via the Server.

3.19.  Multicast Considerations

   When the underlying network does not support multicast, AERO nodes
   map IPv6 link-scoped multicast addresses (including
   'All_DHCP_Relay_Agents_and_Servers') to the link-layer address of a
   Server.

   When the underlying network supports multicast, AERO nodes use the
   multicast address mapping specification found in [RFC2529] for IPv4
   underlying networks and use a direct multicast mapping for IPv6
   underlying networks.  (In the latter case, "direct multicast mapping"
   means that if the IPv6 multicast destination address of the
   encapsulated packet is "M", then the IPv6 multicast destination
   address of the encapsulating header is also "M".)

3.20.  Operation on AERO Links Without DHCPv6 Services

   When Servers on the AERO link do not provide DHCPv6 services,
   operation can still be accommodated through administrative
   configuration of ACPs on AERO Clients.  In that case, administrative
   configurations of AERO interface neighbor cache entries on both the
   Server and Client are also necessary.  However, this may interfere
   with the ability for Clients to dynamically change to new Servers,
   and can expose the AERO link to misconfigurations unless the
   administrative configurations are carefully coordinated.

3.21.  Operation on Server-less AERO Links

   In some AERO link scenarios, there may be no Servers on the link and/
   or no need for Clients to use a Server as an intermediary trust
   anchor.  In that case, each Client acts as a Server unto itself to
   establish neighbor cache entries by performing direct Client-to-
   Client IPv6 ND message exchanges, and some other form of trust basis
   must be applied so that each Client can verify that the prospective
   neighbor is authorized to use its claimed ACP.

   When there is no Server on the link, Clients must arrange to receive
   ACPs and publish them via a secure alternate prefix delegation
   authority through some means outside the scope of this document.



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 46]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


3.22.  Proxy AERO

   Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6) [RFC5213][RFC5844][RFC5949] presents a
   localized mobility management scheme for use within an access network
   domain.  It is typically used in WiFi and cellular wireless access
   networks, and allows Mobile Nodes (MNs) to receive and retain an IP
   address that remains stable within the access network domain without
   needing to implement any special mobility protocols.  In the PMIPv6
   architecture, access network devices known as Mobility Access
   Gateways (MAGs) provide MNs with an access link abstraction and
   receive prefixes for the MNs from a Local Mobility Anchor (LMA).

   In a proxy AERO domain, a proxy AERO Client (acting as a MAG) can
   similarly provide proxy services for MNs that do not participate in
   AERO messaging.  The proxy Client presents an access link abstraction
   to MNs, and performs DHCPv6 PD exchanges over the AERO interface with
   an AERO Server (acting as an LMA) to receive ACPs for address
   provisioning of new MNs that come onto an access link.  This scheme
   assumes that proxy Clients act as fixed (non-mobile) infrastructure
   elements under the same administrative trust basis as for Relays and
   Servers.

   When an MN comes onto an access link within a proxy AERO domain for
   the first time, the proxy Client authenticates the MN and obtains a
   unique identifier that it can use as a DHCPv6 DUID then issues a
   DHCPv6 PD Request to its Server.  When the Server delegates an ACP,
   the proxy Client creates an AERO address for the MN and assigns the
   ACP to the MN's access link.  The proxy Client then configures itself
   as a default router for the MN and provides address autoconfiguration
   services (e.g., SLAAC, DHCPv6, DHCPv4, etc.) for provisioning MN
   addresses from the ACP over the access link.  Since the proxy Client
   may serve many such MNs simultaneously, it may receive multiple ACP
   prefix delegations and configure multiple AERO addresses, i.e., one
   for each MN.

   When two MNs are associated with the same proxy Client, the Client
   can forward traffic between the MNs without involving a Server since
   it configures the AERO addresses of both MNs and therefore also has
   the necessary routing information.  When two MNs are associated with
   different proxy Clients, the source MN's Client can initiate standard
   AERO route optimization to discover a direct path to the target MN's
   Client through the exchange of Predirect/Redirect messages.

   When an MN in a proxy AERO domain leaves an access link provided by
   an old proxy Client, the MN issues an access link-specific "leave"
   message that informs the old Client of the link-layer address of a
   new Client on the planned new access link.  This is known as a
   "predictive handover".  When an MN comes onto an access link provided



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 47]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   by a new proxy Client, the MN issues an access link-specific "join"
   message that informs the new Client of the link-layer address of the
   old Client on the actual old access link.  This is known as a
   "reactive handover".

   Upon receiving a predictive handover indication, the old proxy Client
   sends a DHCPv6 PD Request message directly to the new Client and
   queues any arriving data packets addressed to the departed MN.  The
   Request message includes the MN's ID as the DUID, the ACP in an IA_PD
   option, the AERO address derived from the MN's ACP as the network-
   layer source address, 'All_DHCP_Relay_Agents_and_Servers' as the
   network-layer destination address, the old Client's address as the
   link-layer source address and the new Client's address as the link-
   layer destination address.  When the new Client receives the Request
   message, it changes the link-layer source address to its own address,
   changes the link-layer destination address to the address of its
   Server, and forwards the message to the Server.  At the same time,
   the new Client creates access link state for the ACP in anticipation
   of the MN's arrival (while queuing any data packets until the MN
   arrives), creates a neighbor cache entry for the old Client with
   AcceptTime set to ACCEPT_TIME, then sends a Redirect message back to
   the old Client.  When the old Client receives the Redirect message,
   it creates a neighbor cache entry for new Client with ForwardTime set
   to FORWARD_TIME, then forwards any queued data packets to the new
   Client.  At the same time, the old Client sends a DHCPv6 PD Release
   message to its Server.  Finally, the old Client sends unsolicited NA
   messages to any of the ACP's correspondents with a TLLAO containing
   the link-layer address of the new Client.  This follows the procedure
   specified in Section 3.17.1, except that it is the old Client and not
   the Server that supplies the link-layer address.

   Upon receiving a reactive handover indication, the new proxy Client
   creates access link state for the MN's ACP, sends a DHCPv6 PD Request
   message to its Server, and sends a DHCPv6 PD Release message directly
   to the old Client.  The Release message includes the MN's ID as the
   DUID, the ACP in an IA_PD option, the AERO address derived from the
   MN's ACP as the network-layer source address,
   'All_DHCP_Relay_Agents_and_Servers' as the network-layer destination
   address, the new Client's address as the link-layer source address
   and the old Client's address as the link-layer destination address.
   When the old Client receives the Release message, it changes the
   link-layer source address to its own address, changes the link-layer
   destination address to the address of its Server, and forwards the
   message to the Server.  At the same time, the old Client sends a
   Predirect message back to the new Client and queues any arriving data
   packets addressed to the departed MN.  When the new Client receives
   the Predirect, it creates a neighbor cache entry for the old Client
   with AcceptTime set to ACCEPT_TIME, then sends a Redirect message



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 48]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   back to the old Client.  When the old Client receives the Redirect
   message, it creates a neighbor cache entry for the new Client with
   ForwardTime set to FORWARD_TIME, then forwards any queued data
   packets to the new Client.  Finally, the old Client sends unsolicited
   NA messages to correspondents the same as for the predictive case.

   When a Server processes a DHCPv6 Request message, it creates a
   neighbor cache entry for this ACP if none currently exists.  If a
   neighbor cache entry already exists, however, the Server changes the
   link-layer address to the address of the new proxy Client (this
   satisfies the case of both the old Client and new Client using the
   same Server).

   When a Server processes a DHCPv6 Release message, it resets the
   neighbor cache entry lifetime for this ACP to 5 seconds if the cached
   link-layer address matches the old proxy Client's address.
   Otherwise, the Server ignores the Release message (this satisfies the
   case of both the old Client and new Client using the same Server).

   When a correspondent Client receives an unsolicited NA message, it
   changes the link-layer address for the ACP's neighbor cache entry to
   the address of the new proxy Client.  The correspondent Client then
   issues a Predirect/Redirect exchange to establish a new neighbor
   cache entry in the new Client.

   From an architectural perspective, in addition to the use of DHCPv6
   PD and IPv6 ND signaling the AERO approach differs from PMIPv6 in its
   use of the NBMA virtual link model instead of point-to-point tunnels.
   This provides a more agile interface for Client/Server and Client/
   Client coordinations, and also facilitates simple route optimization.
   The AERO routing system is also arranged in such a fashion that
   Clients get the same service from any Server they happen to associate
   with.  This provides a natural fault tolerance and load balancing
   capability such as desired for distributed mobility management.

3.23.  Extending AERO Links Through Security Gateways

   When an enterprise mobile device moves from a campus LAN connection
   to a public Internet link, it must re-enter the enterprise via a
   security gateway that has both a physical interface connection to the
   Internet and a physical interface connection to the enterprise
   internetwork.  This most often entails the establishment of a Virtual
   Private Network (VPN) link over the public Internet from the mobile
   device to the security gateway.  During this process, the mobile
   device supplies the security gateway with its public Internet address
   as the link-layer address for the VPN.  The mobile device then acts
   as an AERO Client to negotiate with the security gateway to obtain
   its ACP.



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 49]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   In order to satisfy this need, the security gateway also operates as
   an AERO Server with support for AERO Client proxying.  In particular,
   when a mobile device (i.e., the Client) connects via the security
   gateway (i.e., the Server), the Server provides the Client with an
   ACP in a DHCPv6 PD exchange the same as if it were attached to an
   enterprise campus access link.  The Server then replaces the Client's
   link-layer source address with the Server's enterprise-facing link-
   layer address in all AERO messages the Client sends toward neighbors
   on the AERO link.  The AERO messages are then delivered to other
   devices on the AERO link as if they were originated by the security
   gateway instead of by the AERO Client.  In the reverse direction, the
   AERO messages sourced by devices within the enterprise network can be
   forwarded to the security gateway, which then replaces the link-layer
   destination address with the Client's link-layer address and replaces
   the link-layer source address with its own (Internet-facing) link-
   layer address.

   After receiving the ACP, the Client can send IP packets that use an
   address taken from the ACP as the network layer source address, the
   Client's link-layer address as the link-layer source address, and the
   Server's Internet-facing link-layer address as the link-layer
   destination address.  The Server will then rewrite the link-layer
   source address with the Server's own enterprise-facing link-layer
   address and rewrite the link-layer destination address with the
   target AERO node's link-layer address, and the packets will enter the
   enterprise network as though they were sourced from a device located
   within the enterprise.  In the reverse direction, when a packet
   sourced by a node within the enterprise network uses a destination
   address from the Client's ACP, the packet will be delivered to the
   security gateway which then rewrites the link-layer destination
   address to the Client's link-layer address and rewrites the link-
   layer source address to the Server's Internet-facing link-layer
   address.  The Server then delivers the packet across the VPN to the
   AERO Client.  In this way, the AERO virtual link is essentially
   extended *through* the security gateway to the point at which the VPN
   link and AERO link are effectively grafted together by the link-layer
   address rewriting performed by the security gateway.  All AERO
   messaging services (including route optimization and mobility
   signaling) are therefore extended to the Client.

   In order to support this virtual link grafting, the security gateway
   (acting as an AERO Server) must keep static neighbor cache entries
   for all of its associated Clients located on the public Internet.
   The neighbor cache entry is keyed by the AERO Client's AERO address
   the same as if the Client were located within the enterprise
   internetwork.  The neighbor cache is then managed in all ways as
   though the Client were an ordinary AERO Client.  This includes the




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 50]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   AERO IPv6 ND messaging signaling for Route Optimization and Neighbor
   Unreachability Detection.

   Note that the main difference between a security gateway acting as an
   AERO Server and an enterprise-internal AERO Server is that the
   security gateway has at least one enterprise-internal physical
   interface and at least one public Internet physical interface.
   Conversely, the enterprise-internal AERO Server has only enterprise-
   internal physical interfaces.  For this reason security gateway
   proxying is needed to ensure that the public Internet link-layer
   addressing space is kept separate from the enterprise-internal link-
   layer addressing space.  This is afforded through a natural extension
   of the security association caching already performed for each VPN
   client by the security gateway.

3.24.  Extending IPv6 AERO Links to the Internet

   When an IPv6 host ('H1') with an address from an ACP owned by AERO
   Client ('C1') sends packets to a correspondent IPv6 host ('H2'), the
   packets eventually arrive at the IPv6 router that owns ('H2')s
   prefix.  This IPv6 router may or may not be an AERO Client ('C2')
   either within the same home network as ('C1') or in a different home
   network.

   If Client ('C1') is currently located outside the boundaries of its
   home network, it will connect back into the home network via a
   security gateway acting as an AERO Server.  The packets sent by
   ('H1') via ('C1') will then be forwarded through the security gateway
   then through the home network and finally to ('C2') where they will
   be delivered to ('H2').  This could lead to sub-optimal performance
   when ('C2') could instead be reached via a more direct route without
   involving the security gateway.

   Consider the case when host ('H1') has the IPv6 address
   2001:db8:1::1, and Client ('C1') has the ACP 2001:db8:1::/64 with
   underlying IPv6 Internet address of 2001:db8:1000::1.  Also, host
   ('H2') has the IPv6 address 2001:db8:2::1, and Client ('C2') has the
   ACP 2001:db8:2::/64 with underlying IPv6 address of 2001:db8:2000::1.
   Client ('C1') can determine whether 'C2' is indeed also an AERO
   Client willing to serve as a route optimization correspondent by
   resolving the AAAA records for the DNS FQDN that matches ('H2')s
   prefix, i.e.:

   '0.0.0.0.2.0.0.0.8.b.d.0.1.0.0.2.aero.linkupnetworks.net'

   If ('C2') is indeed a candidate correspondent, the FQDN lookup will
   return a PTR resource record that contains the domain name for the
   AERO link that manages ('C2')s ASP.  Client ('C1') can then attempt



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 51]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   route optimization using an approach similar to the Return
   Routability procedure specified for Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) [RFC6275].
   In order to support this process, both Clients MUST intercept and
   decapsulate packets that have a subnet router anycast address
   corresponding to any of the /64 prefixes covered by their respective
   ACPs.

   To initiate the process, Client ('C1') creates a specially-crafted
   encapsulated AERO Predirect message that will be routed through its
   home network then through ('C2')s home network and finally to ('C2')
   itself.  Client ('C1') prepares the initial message in the exchange
   as follows:

   o  The encapsulating IPv6 header source address is set to
      2001:db8:1:: (i.e., the IPv6 subnet router anycast address for
      ('C1')s ACP)

   o  The encapsulating IPv6 header destination address is set to
      2001:db8:2:: (i.e., the IPv6 subnet router anycast address for
      ('C2')s ACP)

   o  The encapsulating IPv6 header is followed by a UDP header with
      source and destination port set to 8060

   o  The encapsulated IPv6 header source address is set to
      fe80::2001:db8:1:0 (i.e., the AERO address for ('C1'))

   o  The encapsulated IPv6 header destination address is set to
      fe80::2001:db8:2:0 (i.e., the AERO address for ('C2'))

   o  The encapsulated AERO Predirect message includes all of the
      securing information that would occur in a MIPv6 "Home Test Init"
      message (format TBD)

   Client ('C1') then further encapsulates the message in the
   encapsulating headers necessary to convey the packet to the security
   gateway (e.g., through IPsec encapsulation) so that the message now
   appears "double-encapsulated".  ('C1') then sends the message to the
   security gateway, which re-encapsulates and forwards it over the home
   network from where it will eventually reach ('C2').

   At the same time, ('C1') creates and sends a second encapsulated AERO
   Predirect message that will be routed through the IPv6 Internet
   without involving the security gateway.  Client ('C1') prepares the
   message as follows:

   o  The encapsulating IPv6 header source address is set to
      2001:db8:1000:1 (i.e., the Internet IPv6 address of ('C1'))



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 52]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   o  The encapsulating IPv6 header destination address is set to
      2001:db8:2:: (i.e., the IPv6 subnet router anycast address for
      ('C2')s ACP)

   o  The encapsulating IPv6 header is followed by a UDP header with
      source and destination port set to 8060

   o  The encapsulated IPv6 header source address is set to
      fe80::2001:db8:1:0 (i.e., the AERO address for ('C1'))

   o  The encapsulated IPv6 header destination address is set to
      fe80::2001:db8:2:0 (i.e., the AERO address for ('C2'))

   o  The encapsulated AERO Predirect message includes all of the
      securing information that would occur in a MIPv6 "Care-of Test
      Init" message (format TBD)

   ('C2') will receive both Predirect messages through its home network
   then return a corresponding Redirect for each of the Predirect
   messages with the source and destination addresses in the inner and
   outer headers reversed.  The first message includes all of the
   securing information that would occur in a MIPv6 "Home Test" message,
   while the second message includes all of the securing information
   that would occur in a MIPv6 "Care-of Test" message (formats TBD).

   When ('C1') receives the Redirect messages, it performs the necessary
   security procedures per the MIPv6 specification.  It then prepares an
   encapsulated NS message that includes the same source and destination
   addresses as for the "Care-of Test Init" Predirect message, and
   includes all of the securing information that would occur in a MIPv6
   "Binding Update" message (format TBD) and sends the message to
   ('C2').

   When ('C2') receives the NS message, if the securing information is
   correct it creates or updates a neighbor cache entry for ('C1') with
   fe80::2001:db8:1:0 as the network-layer address, 2001:db8:1000::1 as
   the link-layer address and with AcceptTime set to ACCEPT_TIME.
   ('C2') then sends an encapsulated NA message back to ('C1') that
   includes the same source and destination addresses as for the "Care-
   of Test" Redirect message, and includes all of the securing
   information that would occur in a MIPv6 "Binding Acknowledgement"
   message (format TBD) and sends the message to ('C1').

   When ('C1') receives the NA message, it creates or updates a neighbor
   cache entry for ('C2') with fe80::2001:db8:2:0 as the network-layer
   address and 2001:db8:2:: as the link-layer address and with
   ForwardTime set to FORWARD_TIME, thus completing the route
   optimization in the forward direction.



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 53]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   ('C1') subsequently forwards encapsulated packets with outer source
   address 2001:db8:1000::1, with outer destination address
   2001:db8:2::, with inner source address taken from the 2001:db8:1::,
   and with inner destination address taken from 2001:db8:2:: due to the
   fact that it has a securely-established neighbor cache entry with
   non-zero ForwardTime.  ('C2') subsequently accepts any such
   encapsulated packets due to the fact that it has a securely-
   established neighbor cache entry with non-zero AcceptTime.

   In order to keep neighbor cache entries alive, ('C1') periodically
   sends additional NS messages to ('C2') and receives any NA responses.
   If ('C1') moves to a different point of attachment after the initial
   route optimization, it sends a new secured NS message to ('C2') as
   above to update ('C2')s neighbor cache.

   If ('C2') has packets to send to ('C1'), it performs a corresponding
   route optimization in the opposite direction following the same
   procedures described above.  In the process, the already-established
   unidirectional neighbor cache entries within ('C1') and ('C2') are
   updated to include the now-bidirectional information.  In particular,
   the AcceptTime and ForwardTime variables for both neighbor cache
   entries are updated to non-zero values, and the link-layer address
   for ('C1')s neighbor cache entry for ('C2') is reset to
   2001:db8:2000::1.

   Note that two AERO Clients can use full security protocol messaging
   instead of Return Routability, e.g., if strong authentication and/or
   confidentiality are desired.  In that case, security protocol key
   exchanges such as specified for MOBIKE [RFC4555] would be used to
   establish security associations and neighbor cache entries between
   the AERO clients.  Thereafter, AERO NS/NA messaging can be used to
   maintain neighbor cache entries, test reachability, and to announce
   mobility events.  If reachability testing fails, e.g., if both
   Clients move at roughly the same time, the Clients can tear down the
   security association and neighbor cache entries and again allow
   packets to flow through their home network.

4.  Implementation Status

   An application-layer implementation is in progress.

5.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is instructed to assign a new 2-octet Hardware Type number
   "TBD1" for AERO in the "arp-parameters" registry per Section 2 of
   [RFC5494].  The number is assigned from the 2-octet Unassigned range
   with Hardware Type "AERO" and with this document as the reference.




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 54]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   IANA is instructed to assign a 4-octet Enterprise Number "TBD2" for
   AERO in the "enterprise-numbers" registry per [RFC3315].

6.  Security Considerations

   AERO link security considerations are the same as for standard IPv6
   Neighbor Discovery [RFC4861] except that AERO improves on some
   aspects.  In particular, AERO uses a trust basis between Clients and
   Servers, where the Clients only engage in the AERO mechanism when it
   is facilitated by a trust anchor.  Unless there is some other means
   of authenticating the Client's identity (e.g., link-layer security),
   AERO nodes SHOULD also use DHCPv6 securing services (e.g., DHCPv6
   authentication, Secure DHCPv6 [I-D.ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6], etc.) for
   Client authentication and network admission control.

   AERO Redirect, Predirect and unsolicited NA messages SHOULD include a
   Timestamp option (see Section 5.3 of [RFC3971]) that other AERO nodes
   can use to verify the message time of origin.  AERO Predirect, NS and
   RS messages SHOULD include a Nonce option (see Section 5.3 of
   [RFC3971]) that recipients echo back in corresponding responses.

   AERO links must be protected against link-layer address spoofing
   attacks in which an attacker on the link pretends to be a trusted
   neighbor.  Links that provide link-layer securing mechanisms (e.g.,
   IEEE 802.1X WLANs) and links that provide physical security (e.g.,
   enterprise network wired LANs) provide a first line of defense that
   is often sufficient.  In other instances, additional securing
   mechanisms such as Secure Neighbor Discovery (SeND) [RFC3971], IPsec
   [RFC4301] or TLS [RFC5246] may be necessary.

   AERO Clients MUST ensure that their connectivity is not used by
   unauthorized nodes on their EUNs to gain access to a protected
   network, i.e., AERO Clients that act as routers MUST NOT provide
   routing services for unauthorized nodes.  (This concern is no
   different than for ordinary hosts that receive an IP address
   delegation but then "share" the address with unauthorized nodes via a
   NAT function.)

   On some AERO links, establishment and maintenance of a direct path
   between neighbors requires secured coordination such as through the
   Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) protocol [RFC5996] to establish a
   security association.

7.  Acknowledgements

   Discussions both on IETF lists and in private exchanges helped shape
   some of the concepts in this work.  Individuals who contributed
   insights include Mikael Abrahamsson, Mark Andrews, Fred Baker,



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 55]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   Stewart Bryant, Brian Carpenter, Wojciech Dec, Ralph Droms, Sri
   Gundavelli, Brian Haberman, Joel Halpern, Sascha Hlusiak, Lee Howard,
   Andre Kostur, Ted Lemon, Joe Touch and Bernie Volz.  Members of the
   IESG also provided valuable input during their review process that
   greatly improved the document.  Special thanks go to Stewart Bryant,
   Joel Halpern and Brian Haberman for their shepherding guidance.

   This work has further been encouraged and supported by Boeing
   colleagues including Keith Bartley, Dave Bernhardt, Cam Brodie,
   Balaguruna Chidambaram, Claudiu Danilov, Wen Fang, Anthony Gregory,
   Jeff Holland, Ed King, Gen MacLean, Kent Shuey, Brian Skeen, Mike
   Slane, Julie Wulff, Yueli Yang, and other members of the BR&T and BIT
   mobile networking teams.

   Earlier works on NBMA tunneling approaches are found in
   [RFC2529][RFC5214][RFC5569].

   Many of the constructs presented in this second edition of AERO are
   based on the author's earlier works, including:

   o  The Internet Routing Overlay Network (IRON)
      [RFC6179][I-D.templin-ironbis]

   o  Virtual Enterprise Traversal (VET)
      [RFC5558][I-D.templin-intarea-vet]

   o  The Subnetwork Encapsulation and Adaptation Layer (SEAL)
      [RFC5320][I-D.templin-intarea-seal]

   o  AERO, First Edition [RFC6706]

   Finally, Satoru Matsushima and Ryuji Wakikawa also discuss BGP in
   their work.  Behcet Sarikaya made comments on the dmm list.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [RFC0768]  Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768,
              August 1980.

   [RFC0791]  Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September
              1981.

   [RFC0792]  Postel, J., "Internet Control Message Protocol", STD 5,
              RFC 792, September 1981.





Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 56]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   [RFC2003]  Perkins, C., "IP Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2003,
              October 1996.

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

   [RFC2460]  Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
              (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.

   [RFC2473]  Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in
              IPv6 Specification", RFC 2473, December 1998.

   [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.

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

   [RFC4213]  Nordmark, E. and R. Gilligan, "Basic Transition Mechanisms
              for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 4213, October 2005.

   [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.

   [RFC6434]  Jankiewicz, E., Loughney, J., and T. Narten, "IPv6 Node
              Requirements", RFC 6434, December 2011.

8.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6]
              Jiang, S., Shen, S., Zhang, D., and T. Jinmei, "Secure
              DHCPv6", draft-ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6-04 (work in progress),
              September 2014.

   [I-D.templin-intarea-seal]
              Templin, F., "The Subnetwork Encapsulation and Adaptation
              Layer (SEAL)", draft-templin-intarea-seal-68 (work in
              progress), January 2014.




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 57]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   [I-D.templin-intarea-vet]
              Templin, F., "Virtual Enterprise Traversal (VET)", draft-
              templin-intarea-vet-40 (work in progress), May 2013.

   [I-D.templin-ironbis]
              Templin, F., "The Interior Routing Overlay Network
              (IRON)", draft-templin-ironbis-16 (work in progress),
              March 2014.

   [I-D.vandevelde-idr-remote-next-hop]
              Velde, G., Patel, K., Rao, D., Raszuk, R., and R. Bush,
              "BGP Remote-Next-Hop", draft-vandevelde-idr-remote-next-
              hop-08 (work in progress), October 2014.

   [RFC0879]  Postel, J., "TCP maximum segment size and related topics",
              RFC 879, November 1983.

   [RFC1035]  Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
              specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.

   [RFC1191]  Mogul, J. and S. Deering, "Path MTU discovery", RFC 1191,
              November 1990.

   [RFC1812]  Baker, F., "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers", RFC
              1812, June 1995.

   [RFC1930]  Hawkinson, J. and T. Bates, "Guidelines for creation,
              selection, and registration of an Autonomous System (AS)",
              BCP 6, RFC 1930, March 1996.

   [RFC1981]  McCann, J., Deering, S., and J. Mogul, "Path MTU Discovery
              for IP version 6", RFC 1981, August 1996.

   [RFC2131]  Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC
              2131, March 1997.

   [RFC2529]  Carpenter, B. and C. Jung, "Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4
              Domains without Explicit Tunnels", RFC 2529, March 1999.

   [RFC2675]  Borman, D., Deering, S., and R. Hinden, "IPv6 Jumbograms",
              RFC 2675, August 1999.

   [RFC2784]  Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P.
              Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784,
              March 2000.

   [RFC2923]  Lahey, K., "TCP Problems with Path MTU Discovery", RFC
              2923, September 2000.



Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 58]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   [RFC3596]  Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi,
              "DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6", RFC 3596,
              October 2003.

   [RFC3819]  Karn, P., Bormann, C., Fairhurst, G., Grossman, D.,
              Ludwig, R., Mahdavi, J., Montenegro, G., Touch, J., and L.
              Wood, "Advice for Internet Subnetwork Designers", BCP 89,
              RFC 3819, July 2004.

   [RFC4271]  Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway
              Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.

   [RFC4291]  Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
              Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.

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

   [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.

   [RFC4555]  Eronen, P., "IKEv2 Mobility and Multihoming Protocol
              (MOBIKE)", RFC 4555, June 2006.

   [RFC4592]  Lewis, E., "The Role of Wildcards in the Domain Name
              System", RFC 4592, July 2006.

   [RFC4821]  Mathis, M. and J. Heffner, "Packetization Layer Path MTU
              Discovery", RFC 4821, March 2007.

   [RFC4963]  Heffner, J., Mathis, M., and B. Chandler, "IPv4 Reassembly
              Errors at High Data Rates", RFC 4963, July 2007.

   [RFC4994]  Zeng, S., Volz, B., Kinnear, K., and J. Brzozowski,
              "DHCPv6 Relay Agent Echo Request Option", RFC 4994,
              September 2007.

   [RFC5213]  Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
              and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.

   [RFC5214]  Templin, F., Gleeson, T., and D. Thaler, "Intra-Site
              Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol (ISATAP)", RFC 5214,
              March 2008.

   [RFC5246]  Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
              (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008.




Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 59]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   [RFC5320]  Templin, F., "The Subnetwork Encapsulation and Adaptation
              Layer (SEAL)", RFC 5320, February 2010.

   [RFC5494]  Arkko, J. and C. Pignataro, "IANA Allocation Guidelines
              for the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP)", RFC 5494,
              April 2009.

   [RFC5522]  Eddy, W., Ivancic, W., and T. Davis, "Network Mobility
              Route Optimization Requirements for Operational Use in
              Aeronautics and Space Exploration Mobile Networks", RFC
              5522, October 2009.

   [RFC5558]  Templin, F., "Virtual Enterprise Traversal (VET)", RFC
              5558, February 2010.

   [RFC5569]  Despres, R., "IPv6 Rapid Deployment on IPv4
              Infrastructures (6rd)", RFC 5569, January 2010.

   [RFC5720]  Templin, F., "Routing and Addressing in Networks with
              Global Enterprise Recursion (RANGER)", RFC 5720, February
              2010.

   [RFC5844]  Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
              Mobile IPv6", RFC 5844, May 2010.

   [RFC5949]  Yokota, H., Chowdhury, K., Koodli, R., Patil, B., and F.
              Xia, "Fast Handovers for Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5949,
              September 2010.

   [RFC5996]  Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., and P. Eronen,
              "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC
              5996, September 2010.

   [RFC6146]  Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful
              NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6
              Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011.

   [RFC6179]  Templin, F., "The Internet Routing Overlay Network
              (IRON)", RFC 6179, March 2011.

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

   [RFC6275]  Perkins, C., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
              in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.





Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 60]


Internet-Draft                    AERO                      October 2014


   [RFC6355]  Narten, T. and J. Johnson, "Definition of the UUID-Based
              DHCPv6 Unique Identifier (DUID-UUID)", RFC 6355, August
              2011.

   [RFC6438]  Carpenter, B. and S. Amante, "Using the IPv6 Flow Label
              for Equal Cost Multipath Routing and Link Aggregation in
              Tunnels", RFC 6438, November 2011.

   [RFC6691]  Borman, D., "TCP Options and Maximum Segment Size (MSS)",
              RFC 6691, July 2012.

   [RFC6706]  Templin, F., "Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization
              (AERO)", RFC 6706, August 2012.

   [RFC6864]  Touch, J., "Updated Specification of the IPv4 ID Field",
              RFC 6864, February 2013.

   [RFC6935]  Eubanks, M., Chimento, P., and M. Westerlund, "IPv6 and
              UDP Checksums for Tunneled Packets", RFC 6935, April 2013.

   [RFC6936]  Fairhurst, G. and M. Westerlund, "Applicability Statement
              for the Use of IPv6 UDP Datagrams with Zero Checksums",
              RFC 6936, April 2013.

   [RFC6939]  Halwasia, G., Bhandari, S., and W. Dec, "Client Link-Layer
              Address Option in DHCPv6", RFC 6939, May 2013.

   [RFC6980]  Gont, F., "Security Implications of IPv6 Fragmentation
              with IPv6 Neighbor Discovery", RFC 6980, August 2013.

   [RFC7078]  Matsumoto, A., Fujisaki, T., and T. Chown, "Distributing
              Address Selection Policy Using DHCPv6", RFC 7078, January
              2014.

   [TUNTAP]   Wikipedia, W., "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TUN/TAP",
              October 2014.

Author's Address

   Fred L. Templin (editor)
   Boeing Research & Technology
   P.O. Box 3707
   Seattle, WA  98124
   USA

   Email: fltemplin@acm.org





Templin                  Expires April 23, 2015                [Page 61]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.122, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/