draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-00.txt   draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-01.txt 
Network Working Group John Loughney (ed) Network Working Group John Loughney (ed)
Internet-Draft Nokia Internet-Draft Nokia
June 18, 2002 July 1, 2002
Expires: December 18, 2002 Expires: December 29, 2002
IPv6 Node Requirements IPv6 Node Requirements
draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-00.txt draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-01.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 33
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 18, 2002. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 1, 2003.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract Abstract
This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes. It is expected This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes. It is expected
that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations. that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations.
Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function
skipping to change at page 2, line 10 skipping to change at page 2, line 10
that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations. that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations.
Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function
well and interoperate in a large number of situations and well and interoperate in a large number of situations and
deployments. deployments.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
1.1 Scope of this Document 1.1 Scope of this Document
1.2 Description of IPv6 Nodes & Conformance Groups 1.2 Description of IPv6 Nodes & Conformance Groups
2. Abbreviations Used in This Document 2. Abbreviations Used in This Document
3. Sub-IP Layer 3. Sub-IP Layer
3.1 RFC2464 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks 3.1 IPv6 over Foo
3.2 RFC2467 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI Networks
3.3 RFC2470 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring
3.4 RFC2472 - IP version 6 over PPP
3.5 RFC2491 - IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) Networks
3.6 RFC2492 - IPv6 over ATM Networks
3.7 RFC2497 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet
Networks
3.8 RFC2529 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IPv4 Domains without Explicit
Tunnels
3.9 RFC2590 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks
Specification
4. IP Layer 4. IP Layer
4.1 General 4.1 General
4.2 Neighbor Discovery 4.2 Neighbor Discovery
4.3 Path MTU Discovery & Packet Size 4.3 Path MTU Discovery & Packet Size
4.4 ICMPv6 4.4 ICMPv6
4.5 Addressing 4.5 Addressing
4.6 Other 4.6 Other
5. Transport and DNS
5. Application Layer, Transport and DNS 5.1 Transport Layer
5.1 RFC2147 - TCP and UDP over IPv6 Jumbograms 5.2 DNS
5.2 RFC2732 - Format for Literal IPv6 Addresses in URL's 5.3 Other
5.3 DNS
5.4 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)
6. Transition 6. Transition
6.1 RFC2893 - Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers 6.1 Transition Mechanisms
7. Mobility 7. Mobility
8. Security 8. Security
8.1 Basic Architecture 8.1 Basic Architecture
8.2 Security Protocols 8.2 Security Protocols
8.3 Transforms and Algorithms 8.3 Transforms and Algorithms
8.4 Key Management Method 8.4 Key Management Method
9. Router Functionality 9. Router Functionality
9.1 RFC2711 - IPv6 Router Alert Option 9.1 General
9.2 RFC2461 - Neighbor Discovery for IPv6
10. Network Management 10. Network Management
10.1 RFC2452 - IPv6 Management Information Base for the Transmission Control 10.1 MIBs
Protocol
10.2 RFC2454 - IPv6 Management Information Base for the User Datagram Protocol
10.3 RFC2465 - Management Information Base for IP Version 6: Textual Conventions
and General Group
10.4 RFC2466 - Management Information Base for IP Version 6: ICMPv6 Group
10.5 RFC2851 - Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses
10.6 RFC3019 - IP Version 6 Management Information Base for the Multicast
Listener Discovery Protocol
11. Security Considerations 11. Security Considerations
12. References 12. References
12.1 Normative 12.1 Normative
12.2 Non-Normative 12.2 Non-Normative
13. Authors and Acknowledgements 13. Authors and Acknowledgements
14. Editor's Address 14. Editor's Address
Appendix A: Change history Appendix A: Change history
Appendix B: List of Specifications Included Appendix B: List of Specifications Included
Appendix C: Specifications Not Included Appendix C: Specifications Not Included
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The goal of this document is to define a minimal set of functionality The goal of this document is to define a minimal set of functionality
required for an IPv6 node. Many IPv6 nodes will implement optional required for an IPv6 node. Many IPv6 nodes will implement optional
or additional features, but all IPv6 nodes can be expected to or additional features, but all IPv6 nodes can be expected to
implement the requirements listed in this document. implement the requirements listed in this document.
skipping to change at page 6, line 30 skipping to change at page 5, line 30
MTU Maximum Transfer Unit MTU Maximum Transfer Unit
NA Neighbor Advertisement NA Neighbor Advertisement
ND Neighbor Discovery ND Neighbor Discovery
NS Neighbor Solicitation NS Neighbor Solicitation
NUD Neighbor Unreachability Detection NUD Neighbor Unreachability Detection
3. Sub-IP Layer (A.K.A - IPv6 over Foo) 3. Sub-IP Layer
An IPv6 node must follow the RFC related to the link-layer that is An IPv6 node must follow the RFC related to the link-layer that is
sending packet. By definition, these specifications are sending packet. By definition, these specifications are
conditionally mandatory, based upon what layer-2 is used. conditionally mandatory, based upon what layer-2 is used. In
general, it is reasonable to be a conformant IPv6 node and NOT
support some legacy interfaces.
3.1 RFC2464 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks 3.1 A.K.A - IPv6 over Foo
3.1.1 RFC2464 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks
Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks [RFC-2464] is Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks [RFC-2464] is
conditionally mandatory if the node has an Ethernet interface. conditionally mandatory if the node supports Ethernet interfaces.
3.2 RFC2467 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI 3.1.2 RFC2467 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI
Networks Networks
A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI Networks A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI Networks
[RFC-2467] is conditionally mandatory if the node has a FDDI [RFC-2467] is conditionally mandatory if the node supports FDDI
interface. interfaces.
3.3 RFC2470 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token 3.1.3 RFC2470 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token
Ring Networks Ring Networks
A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring
Networks [RFC-2470] is conditionally mandatory if the node has a Networks [RFC-2470] is conditionally mandatory if the node supports
token ring interface. token ring interfaces.
3.4 RFC2472 - IP version 6 over PPP 3.1.4 RFC2472 - IP version 6 over PPP
IPv6 over PPP [RFC-2472] is conditionally mandatory if the node IPv6 over PPP [RFC-2472] is conditionally mandatory if the node
supports PPP. supports PPP.
3.5 RFC2491 - IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) Networks 3.1.5 RFC2491 - IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) Networks
IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) Networks [RFC2491] is IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) Networks [RFC2491] is
conditionally mandatory if the node has a NBMA network interface. conditionally mandatory if the node supports NBMA network interfaces.
3.6 RFC2492 - IPv6 over ATM Networks 3.1.6 RFC2492 - IPv6 over ATM Networks
IPv6 over ATM Networks [RFC2492] is conditionally mandatory if the IPv6 over ATM Networks [RFC2492] is conditionally mandatory if the
node has an ATM interface. node supports ATM interfaces. Additionally, the specification
states:
3.7 RFC2497 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet A minimally conforming IPv6/ATM driver SHALL support the PVC mode
Networks of operation. An IPv6/ATM driver that supports the full SVC mode
SHALL also support PVC mode of operation.
3.1.7 RFC2497 - A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over
ARCnet Networks
A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet Networks A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet Networks
[RFC2497] is conditionally mandatory if the node has an ARCnet [RFC2497] is conditionally mandatory if the node supports ARCnet
network interface. network interfaces.
3.8 RFC2529 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IPv4 Domains without 3.1.8 RFC2529 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IPv4 Domains without
Explicit Tunnels Explicit Tunnels
Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IPv4 Domains without Explicit Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IPv4 Domains without Explicit
Tunnels [2529] is unconditionally optional. Tunnels [2529] is unconditionally optional.
3.9 RFC2590 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks 3.1.9 RFC2590 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks
Specification Specification
Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks Specification Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks Specification
[RFC2590] is conditionally mandatory if the node has a Frame Relay [RFC2590] is conditionally mandatory if the node supports Frame Relay
interface. interfaces.
4. IP Layer 4. IP Layer
4.1 General 4.1 General
4.1.1 RFC2460 - Internet Protocol Version 6 4.1.1 RFC2460 - Internet Protocol Version 6
The Internet Protocol Version 6 is specified in [RFC-2460]. This The Internet Protocol Version 6 is specified in [RFC-2460]. This
specification is unconditionally mandatory. specification is unconditionally mandatory.
Unrecognized options in Hop-by-Hop Options or Destination Options Unrecognized options in Hop-by-Hop Options or Destination Options
extensions must be processed as described in RFC 2460. extensions must be processed as described in RFC 2460.
The node must follow the packet transmission rules in RFC 2460. The node must follow the packet transmission rules in RFC 2460.
Nodes must always be able to receive fragment headers. However, if it Nodes must always be able to receive fragment headers. However, if it
does not implement path MTU it may not need to send fragment headers. does not implement path MTU discovery it may not need to send
However, nodes that do not implement transmission of fragment headers fragment headers. However, nodes that do not implement transmission
need to impose limitation to payload size of layer 4 protocols. of fragment headers need to impose limitation to payload size of
layer 4 protocols.
The capability of being a final destination is unconditionally The capability of being a final destination is unconditionally
mandatory, whereas the capability of being an intermediate mandatory, whereas the capability of being an intermediate
destination is unconditionally optional (i.e. - host functionality destination is unconditionally optional (i.e. - host functionality
vs. router functionality). vs. router functionality).
RFC-2460 specifies extension headers and the processing for these RFC 2460 specifies extension headers and the processing for these
headers. headers.
A full implementation of IPv6 includes implementation of the A full implementation of IPv6 includes implementation of the
following extension headers: Hop-by-Hop Options, Routing (Type 0), following extension headers: Hop-by-Hop Options, Routing (Type 0),
Fragment, Destination Options, Authentication and Encapsulating Fragment, Destination Options, Authentication and Encapsulating
Security Payload. [RFC2460] Security Payload. [RFC2460]
It is unconditionally mandatory for an IPv6 node to process these It is unconditionally mandatory for an IPv6 node to process these
headers. headers. It should be noted that there is some discussion about the
use of Routing Headers and possible security threats [IPv6-RH] caused
by them.
4.2 Neighbor Discovery 4.2 Neighbor Discovery
4.2.1 RFC2461 - Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 4.2.1 RFC2461 - Neighbor Discovery for IPv6
Neighbor Discovery is conditionally mandatory. RFC 2461 states: Neighbor Discovery is conditionally mandatory. RFC 2461 states:
"Unless specified otherwise (in a document that covers operating "Unless specified otherwise (in a document that covers operating
IP over a particular link type) this document applies to all link IP over a particular link type) this document applies to all link
types. However, because ND uses link-layer multicast for some of types. However, because ND uses link-layer multicast for some of
skipping to change at page 9, line 4 skipping to change at page 8, line 15
described in this document that are not directly dependent on described in this document that are not directly dependent on
multicast, such as Redirects, Next-hop determination, Neighbor multicast, such as Redirects, Next-hop determination, Neighbor
Unreachability Detection, etc., are expected to be provided as Unreachability Detection, etc., are expected to be provided as
specified in this document. The details of how one uses ND on specified in this document. The details of how one uses ND on
NBMA links is an area for further study." NBMA links is an area for further study."
Some detailed analysis of Neighbor discovery follows: Some detailed analysis of Neighbor discovery follows:
Router Discovery is how hosts locate routers that reside on an Router Discovery is how hosts locate routers that reside on an
attached link. Router Discovery is unconditionally mandatory for attached link. Router Discovery is unconditionally mandatory for
implementations. However, the implementation SHOULD support disabling implementations. However, the implementation MAY support disabling
this feature. this feature.
Prefix Discovery is how hosts discover the set of address prefixes Prefix Discovery is how hosts discover the set of address prefixes
that define which destinations are on-link for an attached link. that define which destinations are on-link for an attached link.
Prefix discovery is unconditionally mandatory for implementation with Prefix discovery is unconditionally mandatory for implementation with
option to disable this function. option to disable this function.
Address resolution is how nodes determine the link-layer address of Address resolution is how nodes determine the link-layer address of
an on-link destination (e.g., a neighbor) given only the an on-link destination (e.g., a neighbor) given only the
destination's IP address. It is conditionally mandatory destination's IP address. It is conditionally mandatory
skipping to change at page 9, line 34 skipping to change at page 8, line 45
may be a NUD's NS), the node MUST respond to it (i.e. send a unicast may be a NUD's NS), the node MUST respond to it (i.e. send a unicast
Neighbor Advertisement). Neighbor Advertisement).
Duplicate Address Detection is unconditionally mandatory (RFC2462 Duplicate Address Detection is unconditionally mandatory (RFC2462
section 5.4 specifies DAD MUST take place on all unicast addresses). section 5.4 specifies DAD MUST take place on all unicast addresses).
Sending Router Solicitation is unconditionally mandatory for host Sending Router Solicitation is unconditionally mandatory for host
implementation, with a configuration option to disable this implementation, with a configuration option to disable this
functionality. functionality.
Receiving Router Advertisement is unconditionally mandatory for host Receiving and processing Router Advertisements is unconditionally
implementation, with a configuration option to disable this mandatory for host implementation, with a configuration option to
functionality. disable this functionality. The ability to understand specific Router
Advertisements is dependent on supporting the specification where the
RA is specified.
Sending and Receiving Neighbor Solicitation (NS) and Neighbor Sending and Receiving Neighbor Solicitation (NS) and Neighbor
Advertisement (NA) are unconditionally mandatory. NS and NA messages Advertisement (NA) are unconditionally mandatory. NS and NA messages
are required for Duplicate Address Detection (DAD). are required for Duplicate Address Detection (DAD).
Router Discovery is Unconditionally mandatory.
Redirect Function is conditionally mandatory. If the node is a Redirect Function is conditionally mandatory. If the node is a
router, Redirect Function is unconditionally mandatory. router, Redirect Function is unconditionally mandatory.
4.3 Path MTU Discovery & Packet Size 4.3 Path MTU Discovery & Packet Size
4.3.1 RFC-1981 - Path MTU Discovery 4.3.1 RFC1981 - Path MTU Discovery
Path MTU Discovery [RFC-1981] is unconditionally optional. The IPv6 Path MTU Discovery [RFC-1981] is unconditionally optional. The IPv6
specification [RFC-2460] states in section 5 that "a minimal IPv6 specification [RFC-2460] states in section 5 that "a minimal IPv6
implementation (e.g., in a boot ROM) may simply restrict itself to implementation (e.g., in a boot ROM) may simply restrict itself to
sending packets no larger than 1280 octets, and omit implementation sending packets no larger than 1280 octets, and omit implementation
of Path MTU Discovery." of Path MTU Discovery."
If Path MTU Discovery is not implemented then the sending packet size If Path MTU Discovery is not implemented then the sending packet size
is limited to 1280 octets (standard limit in [RFC-2460]). is limited to 1280 octets (standard limit in [RFC-2460]).
4.3.2 RFC2675 - IPv6 Jumbograms 4.3.2 RFC2675 - IPv6 Jumbograms
IPv6 Jumbograms [RFC2675] is unconditionally optional. IPv6 Jumbograms [RFC2675] is unconditionally optional.
4.4 ICMPv6 4.4 ICMPv6
ICMPv6 [RFC 2463] is Unconditionally Mandatory. 4.1.1 RFC2463 - ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)
ICMPv6 [RFC-2463] is unconditionally mandatory.
4.5 Addressing 4.5 Addressing
Currently, there is discussion on-going on support for site-local Currently, there is discussion on-going on support for site-local
addressing. addressing.
4.5.1 RFC2373 - IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture 4.5.1 RFC2373 - IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture
The IPv6 Addressing Architecture [RFC-2373] is a mandatory part of The IPv6 Addressing Architecture [RFC-2373] is a mandatory part of
IPv6. Currently, this specification is being updated by [ADDRARCHv3]. IPv6. Currently, this specification is being updated by [ADDRARCHv3].
4.5.2 RFC2462 - IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration 4.5.2 RFC2462 - IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration is defined in [RFC-2462]. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration is defined in [RFC-2462].
This specification is Unconditionally mandatory for nodes that are This specification is unconditionally mandatory for nodes that are
hosts. hosts.
It is unconditionally mandatory for nodes that are routers to It is unconditionally mandatory for nodes that are routers to
generate link local addresses as described in this specification. generate link local addresses as described in this specification.
From 2462: From 2462:
The autoconfiguration process specified in this document applies The autoconfiguration process specified in this document applies
only to hosts and not routers. Since host autoconfiguration uses only to hosts and not routers. Since host autoconfiguration uses
information advertised by routers, routers will need to be information advertised by routers, routers will need to be
skipping to change at page 11, line 19 skipping to change at page 10, line 33
is unconditionally optional. Currently, there is discussion of the is unconditionally optional. Currently, there is discussion of the
applicability of temporary addresses. applicability of temporary addresses.
4.5.4 Default Address Selection for IPv6 4.5.4 Default Address Selection for IPv6
Default Address Selection for IPv6 [DEFADDR] is conditionally Default Address Selection for IPv6 [DEFADDR] is conditionally
mandatory, if a node has more than one IPv6 address per interface or mandatory, if a node has more than one IPv6 address per interface or
a node has more that one IPv6 interface (physical or logical) a node has more that one IPv6 interface (physical or logical)
configured. configured.
The rules specified in the document are the only MUST to implement
portion of the architecture. There is no requirement that a node be
able to be part of more than one zone.
4.5.5 Stateful Address Autoconfiguration
IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC2462] defines stateless
address autoconfiguation. However, it does state that in the absence
of routers, hosts MUST attempt to use stateful autoconfiguration.
There is also reference to stateful address autoconfiguration being
defined elsewhere. Additionally, DHCP [DHCP] states that it is on
option for stateful address autoconfiguation.
From the current set of specification, it is not clear the level of
support that is needed for statefull Address Autoconfiguration.
4.6 Other 4.6 Other
4.6.1 RFC2473 - Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification 4.6.1 RFC2473 - Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification
Generic Packet Tunneling [RFC-2473] conditionally mandatory, with the
Generic Packet Tunneling [RFC-2473] conditionally Mandatory, with the
condition being implementing the mobile node functionality or Home condition being implementing the mobile node functionality or Home
Agent functionality of Mobile IP [MIPv6]. Agent functionality of Mobile IP [MIPv6].
4.6.2 RFC2710 - Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 4.6.2 RFC2710 - Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6
Multicast Listener Discovery [RFC-2710] is Conditionally Mandatory, Multicast Listener Discovery [RFC-2710] is Conditionally Mandatory,
where the condition is if the node joins any multicast groups other where the condition is if the node joins any multicast groups other
than the all-nodes-on-link group (which will always be the case if it than the all-nodes-on-link group (which will always be the case if it
runs ND or DAD on the link). runs ND or DAD on the link).
5. Application Layer, Transport Layer and DNS There has been some discussion that hosts may not be able to depend
on MLD if there is no connection to a router, therefore this may not
be Mandatory. Further discussion is needed on this.
5.1 RFC2147 - TCP and UDP over IPv6 Jumbograms 5. Transport Layer and DNS
5.1 Transport Layer
5.1.1 RFC2147 - TCP and UDP over IPv6 Jumbograms
This specification is conditionally mandatory, if Jumbograms are This specification is conditionally mandatory, if Jumbograms are
implemented [RFC-2675]. One open issue is if this document needs to implemented [RFC-2675]. One open issue is if this document needs to
be updated, as it refers to an obsoleted document. be updated, as it refers to an obsoleted document.
5.2 RFC2732 - Format for Literal IPv6 Addresses in URL's 5.2 DNS
RFC 2732 is Conditionally Mandatory if the node uses URL's.
5.3 DNS
Support for DNS, as described in [RFC-1034], [RFC-1035] and [RFC- Support for DNS, as described in [RFC-1034], [RFC-1035] and [RFC-
1886], is unconditionally optional. Not all nodes will need to 1886], is unconditionally optional. Not all nodes will need to
resolve addresses. resolve addresses.
5.4 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) 5.2.1 RFC2874 - DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation and
Renumbering
DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering is
unconditionally optional
5.2.2 RFC2732 - Format for Literal IPv6 Addresses in URL's
RFC 2732 is conditionally mandatory if the node uses URL's.
5.3 Other
5.3.1 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 [DHCPv6] is The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 [DHCPv6] is
unconditionally optional. unconditionally optional.
6. Transition 6. Transition
6.1 Transition Mechanisms
IPv6 nodes should use native address instead of transition-based IPv6 nodes should use native address instead of transition-based
addressing. addressing.
6.1 RFC2893 - Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers 6.1.1 RFC2893 - Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers
Support for RFC-2893 is conditionally mandatory, if a node supports If an IPv6 node implement dual stack and/or tunneling, then RFC2893
IPv4 as well as IPv6. It specifies dual IP layer operation and IPv6 is unconditionally mandatory.
over IPv4 tunneling for IPv6 nodes.
This document is currently being updated. This document is currently being updated.
7. Mobility 7. Mobility
Currently, the MIPv6 specification [MIPv6] is nearing completion. Currently, the MIPv6 specification [MIPv6] is nearing completion.
Mobile IPv6 places some requirements on IPv6 nodes. This document is Mobile IPv6 places some requirements on IPv6 nodes. This document is
not meant to prescribe behaviors, but to capture the consensus of not meant to prescribe behaviors, but to capture the consensus of
what should be done for IPv6 nodes with respect to Mobile IPv6. what should be done for IPv6 nodes with respect to Mobile IPv6.
The Mobile IP specification [MIPv6] specifies the following classes The Mobile IP specification [MIPv6] specifies the following classes
of functionality: Correspondent Node, Mobile Node, Route Optimization of functionality: Correspondent Node, Mobile Node, Route Optimization
functionality and Home Agent Functionality. functionality and Home Agent Functionality.
Correspondent Node functionality is Unconditionally Mandatory. Correspondent Node functionality is Unconditionally Mandatory.
Mobile Node functionality is Conditionally Mandatory for nodes that Mobile Node functionality is Conditionally Mandatory for nodes that
need to maintain sessions while changing their point of attachment to need to maintain sessions while changing their point of attachment to
the Internet. the Internet.
Route Optimization functionality is conditionally optional for hosts. Route Optimization functionality is conditionally mandatory for
Route Optimization is unconditionally optional for routers. There is hosts. Route Optimization is unconditionally optional for routers.
ongoing discussion about the role of Route Optimization. This There is ongoing discussion about the role of Route Optimization.
document should list some of the benefits of Route Optimization. This document should list some of the benefits of Route Optimization.
Home Agent functionality is Unconditionally Optional. Home Agent functionality is Unconditionally Optional.
8. Security 8. Security
This section describes the specification of IPsec for the IPv6 node. This section describes the specification of IPsec for the IPv6 node.
Other issues that IPsec cannot resolve are described in the security Other issues that IPsec cannot resolve are described in the security
considerations. considerations.
8.1 Basic Architecture 8.1 Basic Architecture
skipping to change at page 13, line 9 skipping to change at page 13, line 4
8. Security 8. Security
This section describes the specification of IPsec for the IPv6 node. This section describes the specification of IPsec for the IPv6 node.
Other issues that IPsec cannot resolve are described in the security Other issues that IPsec cannot resolve are described in the security
considerations. considerations.
8.1 Basic Architecture 8.1 Basic Architecture
Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol [RFC-2401] is Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol [RFC-2401] is
unconditionally mandatory except of the following description. unconditionally mandatory except of the following description.
Requirements that this section describes explicitly MUST refer to Requirements that this section describes explicitly MUST refer to
RFC-2401. RFC-2401.
IPsec transport mode is unconditionally mandatory. IPsec transport mode is unconditionally mandatory.
IPsec tunnel mode is unconditionally optional. IPsec tunnel mode is unconditionally mandatory.
[DISCUSSION: Network administrators want to make separated [DISCUSSION: Network administrators want to make separated
networks to be a single network by using a site-local address networks to be a single network by using a site-local address
space. The routers should be implemented both IPsec transport space. The routers should be implemented both IPsec transport
mode and a generic tunnel in this case, but if there is no mode and a generic tunnel in this case, but if there is no
statement what it should be, the administrators must use IPsec statement what it should be, the administrators must use IPsec
tunnel mode because it is used now in IPv4 network.] tunnel mode because it is used now in IPv4 network.]
Applying single security association of ESP [RFC-2406] to a packet Applying single security association of ESP [RFC-2406] to a packet is
is unconditionally mandatory, although RFC-2401 defines four types unconditionally mandatory, although RFC-2401 defines four types of
of combination of security associations that must be supported by combination of security associations that must be supported by
compliant IPsec hosts, compliant IPsec hosts.
Applying single security association of AH is conditionally Applying single security association of AH is conditionally mandatory
mandatory if AH [RFC-2402] is implemented. if AH [RFC-2402] is implemented.
The following packet type is conditionally mandatory if AH is The following packet type is conditionally mandatory if AH is
combined with ESP: IP|AH|ESP|ULP. combined with ESP: IP|AH|ESP|ULP.
The summary of Basic Combinations of Security Associations in The summary of Basic Combinations of Security Associations in section
section 4.5 of RFC-2401 is: 4.5 of RFC-2401 is:
case 1-2 is unconditionally mandatory. case 1-2 is unconditionally mandatory.
case 1-1 and 1-3 is conditionally mandatory if AH is implemented. case 1-1 and 1-3 is conditionally mandatory if AH is implemented.
case 1-4, 1-5, 2-5 and 4is conditionally optional if IPsec tunnel case 1-4, 1-5, 2-5 and 4is conditionally optional if IPsec tunnel
mode is implemented. mode is implemented.
case 2-4 is conditionally optional if IPsec tunnel mode and AH is case 2-4 is conditionally optional if IPsec tunnel mode and AH is
implemented. implemented.
case 3 is not applicable to this document. case 3 is not applicable to this document.
8.2 Security Protocols 8.2 Security Protocols
ESP [RFC-2406] is unconditionally mandatory even when ESP is not ESP [RFC-2406] is unconditionally mandatory even when ESP is not
used. AH [RFC-2402] is conditionally mandatory if there is data in IP used. AH [RFC-2402] is unconditionally mandatory also.
header to be protected, for example, an extension header.
AH is need if there is data in IP header to be protected, for
example, an extension header.
In practice, ESP can provide the same security services as AH and as
well as confidentiality, thus there is no real need for AH.
8.3 Transforms and Algorithms 8.3 Transforms and Algorithms
The ESP DES-CBC Cipher Algorithm With Explicit IV [RFC-2405] is The ESP DES-CBC Cipher Algorithm With Explicit IV [RFC-2405] is
conditionally mandatory if you need to have interoperability with old conditionally mandatory if you need to have interoperability with old
implementation by using DES-CBC. Note the IPsec WG recommends not implementation by using DES-CBC. Note the IPsec WG recommends not
using this algorithm. 3DES-CBC is conditionally mandatory so that the using this algorithm. 3DES-CBC is conditionally mandatory so that the
part of ESP CBC-Mode Cipher Algorithms [RFC-2451] is unconditionally part of ESP CBC-Mode Cipher Algorithms [RFC-2451] is unconditionally
mandatory. Note that the IPsec WG also recommends not using this mandatory. Note that the IPsec WG also recommends not using this
algorithm. AES-128-CBC [ipsec-ciph-aes-cbc] is unconditionally algorithm. AES-128-CBC [ipsec-ciph-aes-cbc] is unconditionally
mandatory but there is on-going work in the IPsec WG. NULL Encryption mandatory but there is on-going work in the IPsec WG. NULL Encryption
algorithm [RFC-2410] is conditionally mandatory. It is for only algorithm [RFC-2410] is conditionally mandatory. It is only for
providing integrity service, and it is also for debugging use. providing integrity service, and also for debugging use.
The Use of HMAC-SHA-1-96 within ESP that described in [RFC-2404] is The use of HMAC-SHA-1-96 within ESP, described in [RFC-2404], is
unconditionally mandatory. This has to be referred if AH is unconditionally mandatory. This MUST be used if AH is implemented.
implemented. The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP that described in The Use of HMAC-MD5-96 within ESP, described in [RFC-2403], is
[RFC-2403] is unconditionally mandatory. This has to be referred if unconditionally mandatory. This MUST be used if AH is implemented.
AH is implemented. The HMAC-SHA-256-96 Algorithm and Its Use With The "HMAC-SHA-256-96 Algorithm and Its Use With IPsec" [ipsec-ciph-
IPsec [ipsec-ciph-sha-256] is unconditionally mandatory, but it is sha-256] is unconditionally mandatory, but it is being discussed in
working out in the IPsec WG. An implementer MUST refer to Keyed- the IPsec WG. An implementer MUST refer to Keyed-Hashing for Message
Hashing for Message Authentication [RFC-2104]. Authentication [RFC-2104].
8.4 Key Management Method 8.4 Key Management Method
Manual keying is unconditionally mandatory. Manual keying is unconditionally mandatory.
Automated SA and Key Management is conditionally mandatory for the Automated SA and Key Management is conditionally mandatory for the
use of the anti-replay features of AH and ESP, and to accommodate use of the anti-replay features of AH and ESP, and to accommodate
on-demand creation of SAs, session-oriented keying. on-demand creation of SAs, session-oriented keying.
IKE [RFC-2407, RFC2-408, RFC-2409] is unconditionally optional for IKE [RFC-2407, RFC-2408, RFC-2409] is unconditionally optional for
unicast traffic. Note that the IPsec WG is working on a new version unicast traffic. Note that the IPsec WG is working on the successor
of IKE [IKEV2]. Implementers should be aware of the new work. to IKE [SOI].
9. Router Functionality 9. Router Functionality
This section defines general considerations for IPv6 nodes that act This section defines general considerations for IPv6 nodes that act
as routers. It is for future study if this document, or a separate as routers. It is for future study if this document, or a separate
document is needed to fully define IPv6 router requirements. document is needed to fully define IPv6 router requirements.
Currently, this section does not discuss routing protocols. Currently, this section does not discuss routing protocols.
9.1 RFC2711 - IPv6 Router Alert Option 9.1 General
The Router Alert Option [RFC-2711] is conditionally mandatory if the 9.1.1 RFC2711 - IPv6 Router Alert Option
node does performs packet forwarding at the IP layer.
9.2 RFC2461 - Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 The Router Alert Option [RFC-2711] is conditionally mandatory if the
node performs packet forwarding at the IP layer (i.e. - the node is a
router).
9.1.2 RFC2461 - Neighbor Discovery for IPv6
Sending Router Advertisements and processing Router Solicitation is Sending Router Advertisements and processing Router Solicitation is
unconditionally mandatory. unconditionally mandatory.
10. Network Management 10. Network Management
Network Management, is generally not a requirement for IPv6 nodes. Network Management, is generally not a requirement for IPv6 nodes.
However, for IPv6 nodes that are embedded devices, network management However, for IPv6 nodes that are embedded devices, network management
may be the only possibility to control these hosts. In a general may be the only possibility to control these hosts.
sense, MIBs can be considered conditionally mandatory when there is
no other means to manage the IPv6 node. This section is for further
study. It should be also noted that these specifications are updated.
10.1 RFC2452 - IPv6 Management Information Base for the Transmission 10.1 MIBs
In a general sense, MIBs can be considered conditionally mandatory
when the node supports an SNMP agent. This section is for further
study. It should be also noted that these specifications are being
updated updated.
10.1.1 RFC2452 - IPv6 Management Information Base for the Transmission
Control Protocol Control Protocol
10.2 RFC2454 - IPv6 Management Information Base for the User Datagram TBA
10.1.2 RFC2454 - IPv6 Management Information Base for the User Datagram
Protocol Protocol
10.3 RFC2465 - Management Information Base for IP Version 6: Textual TBA
10.1.3 RFC2465 - Management Information Base for IP Version 6: Textual
Conventions and General Group Conventions and General Group
10.4 RFC2466 - Management Information Base for IP Version 6: ICMPv6 TBA
10.1.4 RFC2466 - Management Information Base for IP Version 6: ICMPv6
Group Group
10.5 RFC2851 - Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses TBA
10.6 RFC3019 - IP Version 6 Management Information Base for the 10.1.5 RFC2851 - Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses
TBA
10.1.6 RFC3019 - IP Version 6 Management Information Base for the
Multicast Listener Discovery Protocol Multicast Listener Discovery Protocol
TBA
11. Security Considerations 11. Security Considerations
This draft does not affect the security of the Internet, but This draft does not affect the security of the Internet, but
implementations of IPv6 are expected to support a minimum set of implementations of IPv6 are expected to support a minimum set of
security features to ensure security on the Internet. "IP Security security features to ensure security on the Internet. "IP Security
Document Roadmap" [RFC-2411] is important for everyone to read. Document Roadmap" [RFC-2411] is important for everyone to read.
The security considerations in RFC2401 describes, The security considerations in RFC2401 describes,
skipping to change at page 16, line 28 skipping to change at page 17, line 8
[DEFADDR] Draves, R., "Default Address Selection for IPv6", Work [DEFADDR] Draves, R., "Default Address Selection for IPv6", Work
in progress. in progress.
[DHCPv6] Bound, J. et al., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol [DHCPv6] Bound, J. et al., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", Work in progress. for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", Work in progress.
[MIPv6] Johnson D. and Perkins, C., "Mobility Support in [MIPv6] Johnson D. and Perkins, C., "Mobility Support in
IPv6", Work in progress. IPv6", Work in progress.
[RFC-1981] McCann, J., Mogul, J. and Deering, S., "Path MTU
Discovery for IP version 6", RFC 1981, August 1996.
[RFC-1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [RFC-1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[RFC-1886] Thomson, S. and Huitema, C., "DNS Extensions to sup- [RFC-1886] Thomson, S. and Huitema, C., "DNS Extensions to sup-
port IP version 6, RFC 1886, December 1995. port IP version 6, RFC 1886, December 1995.
[RFC-1981] McCann, J., Mogul, J. and Deering, S., "Path MTU
Discovery for IP version 6", RFC 1981, August 1996.
[RFC-2104] Krawczyk, K., Bellare, M., and Canetti, R., "HMAC: [RFC-2104] Krawczyk, K., Bellare, M., and Canetti, R., "HMAC:
Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104, Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication", RFC 2104,
February 1997. February 1997.
[RFC-2246] Dierks, T. and Allen, C., "The TLS Protocol Version
1.0", RFC 2246, January 1999
[RFC-2373] Hinden, R. and Deering, S., "IP Version 6 Addressing [RFC-2373] Hinden, R. and Deering, S., "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998. Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998.
[RFC-2401] Kent, S. and Atkinson, R., "Security Architecture for [RFC-2401] Kent, S. and Atkinson, R., "Security Architecture for
the Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998. the Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998.
[RFC-2402] Kent, S. and Atkinson, R., "IP Authentication [RFC-2402] Kent, S. and Atkinson, R., "IP Authentication
Header", RFC 2402, November 1998. Header", RFC 2402, November 1998.
[RFC-2403] Madson, C., and Glenn, R., "The Use of HMAC-MD5 within [RFC-2403] Madson, C., and Glenn, R., "The Use of HMAC-MD5 within
skipping to change at page 18, line 32 skipping to change at page 19, line 11
[RFC-2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W. and Haberman, B., "Multicast [RFC-2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W. and Haberman, B., "Multicast
Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October
1999. 1999.
[RFC-2711] Partridge, C. and Jackson, A., "IPv6 Router Alert [RFC-2711] Partridge, C. and Jackson, A., "IPv6 Router Alert
Option", RFC 2711, October 1999. Option", RFC 2711, October 1999.
12.2 Non-Normative 12.2 Non-Normative
[ANYCAST] Hagino, J and Ettikan K., "An Analysis of IPv6 Anycast" [ANYCAST] Hagino, J and Ettikan K., "An Analysis of IPv6 Any-
Work in Progress. cast" Work in Progress.
[IKEv2] Harkins, D. et. al, "Proposal for the IKEv2 Protocol", [SOI] C. Madson, "Son-of-IKE Requirements", Work in Pro-
Work in Progress. gress.
[RFC-793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", RFC 793, [RFC-793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", RFC 793,
August 1980. August 1980.
[RFC-1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facili- [RFC-1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facili-
ties", RFC 1034, November 1987. ties", RFC 1034, November 1987.
[RFC-2147] Borman, D., "TCP and UDP over IPv6 Jumbograms", RFC 2147, [RFC-2147] Borman, D., "TCP and UDP over IPv6 Jumbograms", RFC
May 1997. 2147, May 1997.
[RFC-2452] M. Daniele, "IPv6 Management Information Base for the [RFC-2452] M. Daniele, "IPv6 Management Information Base for the
Transmission Control Protocol", RFC2452, December 1998. Transmission Control Protocol", RFC2452, December
1998.
[RFC-2454] M. Daniele, "IPv6 Management Information Base for the [RFC-2454] M. Daniele, "IPv6 Management Information Base for the
User Datagram Protocol, RFC2454", December 1998. User Datagram Protocol, RFC2454", December 1998.
[RFC-2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet [RFC-2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Eth-
Networks", RFC 2462, December 1998. ernet Networks", RFC 2462, December 1998.
[RFC-2465] D. Haskin, S. Onishi, "Management Information Base for IP [RFC-2465] D. Haskin, S. Onishi, "Management Information Base for
Version 6: Textual Conventions and General Group", IP Version 6: Textual Conventions and General Group",
RFC2465, December 1998. RFC2465, December 1998.
[RFC-2467] M. Crawford, "A Method for the Tranmission of IPv6 Pack- [RFC-2466] D. Haskin, S. Onishi, "Management Information Base for
ets over FDDI Networks", RFC2467, December 1998. IP Version 6: ICMPv6 Group", RFC2466, December 1998.
[RFC-2467] M. Crawford, "A Method for the Tranmission of IPv6
Packets over FDDI Networks", RFC2467, December 1998.
[RFC-2470] M. Crawford, T. Narten, S. Thomas, "A Method for the [RFC-2470] M. Crawford, T. Narten, S. Thomas, "A Method for the
Tranmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring Networks", Tranmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring Networks",
RFC2470, December 1998. RFC2470, December 1998.
[RFC-2491] G. Armitage, P. Schulter, M. Jork, G. Harter, "IPv6 over [RFC-2491] G. Armitage, P. Schulter, M. Jork, G. Harter, "IPv6
Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) networks", RFC2491, over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) networks",
January 1999. RFC2491, January 1999.
[RFC-2492] G. Armitage, M. Jork, P. Schulter, G. Harter, IPv6 over [RFC-2492] G. Armitage, M. Jork, P. Schulter, G. Harter, IPv6
ATM Networks", RFC2492, January 1999. over ATM Networks", RFC2492, January 1999.
[RFC-2497] I. Souvatzis, "A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 [RFC-2497] I. Souvatzis, "A Method for the Transmission of IPv6
Packets over ARCnet Networks", RFC2497, January 1999. Packets over ARCnet Networks", RFC2497, January 1999.
[RFC-2529] Carpenter, B. and Jung, C., "Transmission of IPv6 over [RFC-2529] Carpenter, B. and Jung, C., "Transmission of IPv6 over
IPv4 Domains without Explicit Tunnels", RFC 2529, March IPv4 Domains without Explicit Tunnels", RFC 2529,
1999. March 1999.
[RFC-2566] D. Haskin, S. Onishi, "Management Information Base for IP
Version 6: ICMPv6 Group", RFC2466, December 1998.
[RFC-2590] A. Conta, A. Malis, M. Mueller, "Transmission of IPv6 [RFC-2590] A. Conta, A. Malis, M. Mueller, "Transmission of IPv6
Packets over Frame Relay Networks Specification", RFC Packets over Frame Relay Networks Specification", RFC
2590, May 1999. 2590, May 1999.
[RFC-2675] Borman, D., Deering, S. and Hinden, B., "IPv6 Jumbo- [RFC-2675] Borman, D., Deering, S. and Hinden, B., "IPv6 Jumbo-
grams", RFC 2675, August 1999. grams", RFC 2675, August 1999.
[RFC-2893] Gilligan, R. and Nordmark, E., "Transition Mechanisms for [RFC-2732] R. Hinden, B. Carpenter, L. Masinter, "Format for
IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 2893, August 2000. Literal IPv6 Addresses in URL's", RFC 2732, December
1999.
[RFC-2851] M. Daniele, B. Haberman, S. Routhier, J. Schoenwaelder, [RFC-2851] M. Daniele, B. Haberman, S. Routhier, J.
"Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses", Schoenwaelder, "Textual Conventions for Internet Net-
RFC2851, June 2000. work Addresses", RFC2851, June 2000.
[RFC-2874] Crawford, M. and Huitema, C., "DNS Extensions to Support [RFC-2874] Crawford, M. and Huitema, C., "DNS Extensions to Sup-
IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering", RFC 2874, July port IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering", RFC
2000. 2874, July 2000.
[RFC-3041] Narten, T. and Draves, R., "Privacy Extensions for State- [RFC-2893] Gilligan, R. and Nordmark, E., "Transition Mechanisms
less Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6", RFC 3041, Janu- for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 2893, August 2000.
ary 2001.
[RFC-3056] Carpenter, B. and Moore, K., "Connection of IPv6 domains [RFC-3019] B. Haberman, R. Worzella, "IP Version 6 Management
via IPv4 clouds", RFC 3056, February 2001. Information Base for the Multicast Listener Discovery
Protocol", RFC3019, January 2001.
[RFC-3019] B. Haberman, R. Worzella, "IP Version 6 Management Infor- [RFC-3041] Narten, T. and Draves, R., "Privacy Extensions for
mation Base for the Multicast Listener Discovery Proto- Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6", RFC
col", RFC3019, January 2001. 3041, January 2001.
[IPv6-RH] P. Savola, "Security of IPv6 Routing Header and Home
Address Options", Work in Progress, March 2002.
13. Authors and Acknowledgements 13. Authors and Acknowledgements
This document was written by the IPv6 Node Requirements design team: This document was written by the IPv6 Node Requirements design team:
Jari Arkko Jari Arkko
[jari.arkko@ericsson.com] [jari.arkko@ericsson.com]
Marc Blanchet Marc Blanchet
[Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca] [Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca]
skipping to change at page 21, line 47 skipping to change at page 22, line 24
Shoichi Sakane Shoichi Sakane
[shouichi.sakane@jp.yokogawa.com] [shouichi.sakane@jp.yokogawa.com]
Dave Thaler Dave Thaler
[dthaler@windows.microsoft.com] [dthaler@windows.microsoft.com]
Juha Wiljakka Juha Wiljakka
[juha.wiljakka@Nokia.com] [juha.wiljakka@Nokia.com]
The authors would like to thank Adam Machalek, Juha Ollila and Pekka Savola for their comments.
14. Editor's Contact Information 14. Editor's Contact Information
Comments or questions regarding this document should be sent to the IPv6 Comments or questions regarding this document should be sent to the IPv6 Working Group mailing list (ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com) or to:
Working Group mailing list (ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com) or to:
John Loughney John Loughney
Nokia Research Center Nokia Research Center
It„merenkatu 11-13 It„merenkatu 11-13
00180 Helsinki 00180 Helsinki
Finland Finland
Phone: +358 50 483 6242 Phone: +358 50 483 6242
Email: John.Loughney@Nokia.com Email: John.Loughney@Nokia.com
Appendix A: Change history Appendix A: Change history
The following is a list of changes since the previous version.
- Small updates based upon feedback from the IPv6 mailing list.
- Refomated chapters.
- Added Appendix B - List of RFCs.
TBD TBD
Appendix B: List of RFCs Appendix B: List of RFCs
This is a list of RFC to look at during the editing process. They are classified by generic categories and by level of potential conformance. The * denotes some sections of the specification have lesser level of conformance required.
This is a list of RFC to look at during the editing process. They are RFC Section Conformance
classified by generic categories and by level of potential conformance. ========================================================
RFC-1034 5.2.1 unconditionally optional
TBD RFC-1035 5.2.1 unconditionally optional
RFC-1886 5.2.1 unconditionally optional
RFC-1981 4.3.1 unconditionally optional
RFC-2104 8.3 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2147 5.1.1 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2373 4.5.1 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2401 8.1 unconditionally mandatory *
RFC-2402 8.1 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2403 8.3 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2404 8.3 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2405 8.3 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2406 8.1 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2407 8.4 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2408 8.4 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2409 8.4 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2410 8.3 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2451 8.3 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2452 10.1.1 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2454 10.1.2 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2460 4.1.1 unconditionally mandatory *
RFC-2461 4.2.1 unconditionally mandatory *
RFC-2462 4.5.2 unconditionally mandatory *
RFC-2463 4.5.1 unconditionally mandatory
RFC-2464 3.1.1 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2465 10.1.3 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2466 10.1.4 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2467 3.1.2 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2470 3.1.3 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2472 3.1.4 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2473 4.6.1 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2491 3.1.5 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2492 3.1.6 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2497 3.1.7 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2529 3.1.8 unconditionally optional
RFC-2590 3.1.9 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2675 4.3.2 unconditionally optional
RFC-2710 4.6.2 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2711 9.1.1 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2732 5.2.2 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2851 10.1.5 conditionally mandatory
RFC-2874 5.3.1 unconditionally optional
RFC-2893 6.1.1 conditionally mandatory
RFC-3019 10.1.6 conditionally mandatory
RFC-3041 4.5.3 unconditionally optional
Appendix C: Specifications Not Included Appendix C: Specifications Not Included
Here is a list of documents considered, but not included in this document. Here is a list of documents considered, but not included in this document. In general, Information documents are not considered to place requirements on implementations. Experimental documents are just that, experimental, and cannot place requirements on the general behavior of IPv6 nodes.
In general, Information documents are not considered to place requirements on
implementations. Experimental documents are just that, experimental, and
cannot place requirements on the general behavior of IPv6 nodes.
Upper Protocols Upper Protocols
2428 FTP Extensions For IPv6 And NATs 2428 FTP Extensions For IPv6 And NATs
Compression Compression
2507 IP Header Compression 2507 IP Header Compression
2508 Compressing IP/UDP/RTP Headers For Low-Speed Serial Links 2508 Compressing IP/UDP/RTP Headers For Low-Speed Serial Links
2509 IP Header Compression Over PPP 2509 IP Header Compression Over PPP
Informational Informational
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/