draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06.txt   draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-07.txt 
SIPCORE O. Johansson SIPCORE O. Johansson
Internet-Draft Edvina AB Internet-Draft Edvina AB
Updates: 3263 (if approved) G. Salgueiro Updates: 3263 (if approved) G. Salgueiro
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems
Expires: November 3, 2016 V. Gurbani Expires: January 9, 2017 V. Gurbani
Bell Labs, Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs, Nokia Networks
D. Worley, Ed. D. Worley, Ed.
Ariadne Ariadne
May 2, 2016 July 8, 2016
Locating Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers in a Dual-Stack IP Locating Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers in a Dual-Stack IP
Network Network
draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06 draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-07
Abstract Abstract
RFC 3263 defines how a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) RFC 3263 defines how a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
implementation, given a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), should implementation, given a SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI), should
locate the next-hop SIP server using Domain Name System (DNS) locate the next-hop SIP server using Domain Name System (DNS)
procedures. As SIP networks increasingly transition from IPv4-only procedures. As SIP networks increasingly transition from IPv4-only
to dual-stack, a quality user experience must be ensured for dual- to dual-stack, a quality user experience must be ensured for dual-
stack SIP implementations. This document updates the DNS procedures stack SIP implementations. This document updates the DNS procedures
described in RFC 3263 for dual-stack SIP implementations in described in RFC 3263 for dual-stack SIP implementations in
skipping to change at page 1, line 44 skipping to change at page 1, line 44
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 3, 2016. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 9, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 31 skipping to change at page 2, line 31
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. DNS Procedures in a Dual-Stack Network . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. DNS Procedures in a Dual-Stack Network . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Dual-Stack SIP UA DNS Record Lookup Procedure . . . . . . 4 3.1. Dual-Stack SIP UA DNS Record Lookup Procedure . . . . . . 4
3.2. Indicating Address Family Preference in DNS SRV Records . 5 3.2. Indicating Address Family Preference in DNS SRV Records . 5
4. Clarification of interaction with RFC 6724 . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Clarification of interaction with RFC 6724 . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Revision History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Revision History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8.1. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05 to 8.1. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06 to
draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06 . . . . . . . . . . 7 draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-07 . . . . . . . . . . 8
8.2. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04 to 8.2. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05 to
draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06 . . . . . . . . . . 8
8.3. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04 to
draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05 . . . . . . . . . . 8 draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05 . . . . . . . . . . 8
8.3. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03 to 8.4. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03 to
draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04 . . . . . . . . . . 8 draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04 . . . . . . . . . . 8
8.4. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-02 to 8.5. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-02 to
draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03 . . . . . . . . . . 8 draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03 . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP, [RFC3261]) and the additional The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP, [RFC3261]) and the additional
documents that extended it provide support for both IPv4 and IPv6. documents that extended it provide support for both IPv4 and IPv6.
However, this support does not fully extend to the highly hybridized However, this support does not fully extend to the highly hybridized
environments that are characteristic of the transitional migratory environments that are characteristic of the transitional migratory
phase from IPv4 to IPv6 networks. During this phase, many server and phase from IPv4 to IPv6 networks. During this phase, many server and
client implementations run on dual-stack hosts. In such client implementations run on dual-stack hosts. In such
environments, a dual-stack host will likely suffer greater connection environments, a dual-stack host will likely suffer greater connection
delay, and by extension an inferior user experience, than an delay, and by extension an inferior user experience, than an
IPv4-only host. The need to remedy this diminished performance of IPv4-only host. The need to remedy this diminished performance of
dual-stack hosts led to the development of the Happy Eyeballs dual-stack hosts led to the development of the Happy Eyeballs
[RFC6555] algorithm, which has since been implemented in many [RFC6555] algorithm, which has since been implemented in many
protocols and applications. protocols and applications.
This document updates the DNS lookup procedures of RFC 3263 [RFC3263] This document updates the DNS lookup procedures of RFC 3263 [RFC3263]
in preparation for the specification of the application of Happy in preparation for the specification of the application of Happy
Eyeballs to SIP to provide enhanced performance, and consequently Eyeballs to SIP. Happy Eyeballs will provide enhanced performance,
user experience, in highly hybridized dual-stack SIP networks. The and consequently user experience, in highly hybridized dual-stack SIP
procedures described herein are such that a dual-stack client should networks. The procedures described herein are such that a dual-stack
look up both A and AAAA records in DNS and then select the best way client should look up both A and AAAA records in DNS and then select
to set up a network flow. The details of how the latter is done is the best way to set up a network flow. The details of how the latter
considered out of scope for this document. See the Happy Eyeballs is done is considered out of scope for this document. See the Happy
algorithm and implementation and design considerations in RFC 6555 Eyeballs algorithm and implementation and design considerations in
[RFC6555] for more information about issues with setting up dual- RFC 6555 [RFC6555] for more information about issues with setting up
stack network flows. dual-stack network flows.
Section 4 of this document clarifies the interaction of [RFC3263] Section 4 of this document clarifies the interaction of [RFC3263]
with [RFC6157] and [RFC6724]. with [RFC6157] and [RFC6724].
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
skipping to change at page 4, line 9 skipping to change at page 4, line 9
supporting both IPv4 and IPv6: supporting both IPv4 and IPv6:
IPv4-only UA/UAC/UAS: An IPv4-only UA/UAC/UAS supports SIP signaling IPv4-only UA/UAC/UAS: An IPv4-only UA/UAC/UAS supports SIP signaling
and media only on the IPv4 network. It does not understand IPv6 and media only on the IPv4 network. It does not understand IPv6
addresses. addresses.
IPv6-only UA/UAC/UAS: An IPv6-only UA/UAC/UAS supports SIP signaling IPv6-only UA/UAC/UAS: An IPv6-only UA/UAC/UAS supports SIP signaling
and media only on the IPv6 network. It does not understand IPv4 and media only on the IPv6 network. It does not understand IPv4
addresses. addresses.
IPv4/IPv6 UA/UAC/UAS: A UA/UAC/UAS that supports SIP signaling and dual-stack UA/UAC/UAS: A UA/UAC/UAS that supports SIP signaling and
media on both IPv4 and IPv6 networks; such a UA/UAC/UAS is known media on both IPv4 and IPv6 networks.
(and will be referred to in this document) as a "dual-stack"
[RFC4213] UA/UAC/UAS.
The term "address records" means the DNS records which translate a The term "address records" means the DNS records which translate a
domain name into addresses within the address family(ies) that the domain name into addresses within the address family(ies) that the
entity supports (as A records provide IPv4 addresses and AAAA records entity supports (as A records provide IPv4 addresses and AAAA records
provide IPv6 addresses), regardless of whether the address family was provide IPv6 addresses), regardless of whether the address family was
defined before or after this document was approved. defined before or after this document was approved.
3. DNS Procedures in a Dual-Stack Network 3. DNS Procedures in a Dual-Stack Network
This specification introduces two normative DNS lookup procedures. This specification introduces two normative DNS lookup procedures.
skipping to change at page 5, line 16 skipping to change at page 5, line 12
record" is not an effective practice for dual-stack clients and that record" is not an effective practice for dual-stack clients and that
it can add significant connection delay and greatly degrade user it can add significant connection delay and greatly degrade user
experience. Therefore, this document makes the following normative experience. Therefore, this document makes the following normative
addendum to the DNS lookup procedures of Section 4.2 of RFC 3263 addendum to the DNS lookup procedures of Section 4.2 of RFC 3263
[RFC3263] for IPv4/IPv6 hybrid SIP networks and recommends it as a [RFC3263] for IPv4/IPv6 hybrid SIP networks and recommends it as a
best practice for such dual-stack networks: best practice for such dual-stack networks:
The dual-stack client SHOULD look up all address records (i.e., The dual-stack client SHOULD look up all address records (i.e.,
for all address family(ies) that it supports) for the domain name for all address family(ies) that it supports) for the domain name
and add the resulting addresses to the list of IP addresses to be and add the resulting addresses to the list of IP addresses to be
contacted. A client MUST be prepared for DNS lookups to return contacted. A client MUST be prepared for the existence of DNS
addresses in families that it does not support; such addresses resource records containing addresses in families that it does not
MUST be ignored as unusable and the supported addresses used as support; if such records may be returned by the client's DNS
specified herein. queries, such records MUST be ignored as unusable and the
supported addresses used as specified herein.
3.2. Indicating Address Family Preference in DNS SRV Records 3.2. Indicating Address Family Preference in DNS SRV Records
The Happy Eyeballs algorithm [RFC6555] is particularly effective when The Happy Eyeballs algorithm [RFC6555] is particularly effective for
dual-stack client applications have significant performance dual-stack HTTP client applications that have significant performance
differences in their IPv4 or IPv6 network paths. In this common differences between their IPv4 and IPv6 network paths. This is
scenario it is often necessary for a dual-stack client to indicate a because the client can initiate two TCP connections to the server,
preference for either IPv4 or IPv6. A service may use DNS SRV one using IPv4 and one using IPv6, and then use the connection which
records to indicate such a preference for an address family. This completes first.
way, a server with a high-latency and/or low-capacity IPv4 tunnel may
indicate a preference for being contacted using IPv6. A server that Unfortunately, in common SIP situations, it is not possible to "race"
wishes to do this can use the lowest SRV priority to publish simultaneous request attempts using two address families. In this
hostnames that only resolve in IPv6 and the next priority with host common scenario it is often necessary for a dual-stack client to
names that resolve in both address families. indicate a preference for either IPv4 or IPv6. A service may use DNS
SRV records to indicate such a preference for an address family.
This way, a server with a high-latency and/or low-capacity IPv4
tunnel may indicate a preference for being contacted using IPv6. A
server that wishes to do this can use the lowest SRV priority to
publish hostnames that only resolve in IPv6 and the next priority
with host names that resolve in both address families.
Note that hostnames that have addresses in only one address family
are discouraged by [RFC6555]. Such special-purpose hostnames SHOULD
be used only as described in this section, as targets of SRV records
for an aggregate host name, where the aggregate host name ultimately
resolves to addresses in all families supported by the client.
4. Clarification of interaction with RFC 6724 4. Clarification of interaction with RFC 6724
Section 5 of [RFC6157] specifies that the addresses from the address Section 5 of [RFC6157] specifies that the addresses from the address
records for a single target DNS name for a server's DNS name must be records for a single target DNS name for a server's DNS name must be
contacted in the order specified by the Source and Destination contacted in the order specified by the source and destination
Address Selection algorithms defined in [RFC6724] (the successor of address selection algorithms defined in [RFC6724] (the successor of
[RFC3484]). Typically, this is done by using the getaddrinfo() [RFC3484]). The set of addresses provided to a single invocation of
the destination address selection algorithm MUST be the address
records for the target DNS name in a single SRV record (or, if there
are no SRV records, the DNS name in the URI or derived via NAPTR) --
the destination address selection algorithm MUST NOT reorder
addresses derived from different SRV records. Typically, desination
address selection is done by using the (relatively new) getaddrinfo()
function to translate the target DNS name into a list of IPv4 and/or function to translate the target DNS name into a list of IPv4 and/or
IPv6 addresses in the order in which they are to be contacted, as IPv6 addresses in the order in which they are to be contacted, as
that function implements [RFC6724]. that function implements [RFC6724].
Thus, if SRV lookup on the server's DNS name is successful, the major Thus, if SRV lookup on the server's DNS name is successful, the major
ordering of the complete list of destination addresses is determined ordering of the complete list of destination addresses is determined
by the priority and weight fields of the SRV records (as specified in by the priority and weight fields of the SRV records (as specified in
[RFC2782]) and the (minor) ordering among the destinations derived [RFC2782]) and the (minor) ordering among the destinations derived
from the "target" field of a single SRV record is determined by from the "target" field of a single SRV record is determined by
[RFC6724]. [RFC6724].
skipping to change at page 7, line 11 skipping to change at page 7, line 26
In particular, the destination addresses derived from sip- In particular, the destination addresses derived from sip-
1.example.com and those derived from sip-2.example.com are not 1.example.com and those derived from sip-2.example.com are not
interleaved; [RFC6724] does not operate on the complete list. This interleaved; [RFC6724] does not operate on the complete list. This
would be true even if the two SRV records had the same priority and would be true even if the two SRV records had the same priority and
were (randomly) ordered based on their weights, as the address were (randomly) ordered based on their weights, as the address
records of two target DNS names are never interleaved. records of two target DNS names are never interleaved.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
This document introduces two new normative procedures to the existing This document introduces two new normative procedures to the existing
DNS procedures used to locate SIP servers. While both of these DNS procedures used to locate SIP servers. A client may contact
procedures are optimizations designed to improve the performance of additional target addresses for a URI beyond those prescribed in
dual-stack clients, neither introduces any new security [RFC3263], and/or it may contact target addresses in a different
considerations. order than prescribed in [RFC3263]. Neither of these changes
introduce any new security considerations because it has always been
assumed that a client desiring to send to a URI may contact any of
its targets that are listed in DNS.
The specific security vulnerabilities, attacks and threat models of The specific security vulnerabilities, attacks and threat models of
the various protocols discussed in this document (SIP, DNS, SRV the various protocols discussed in this document (SIP, DNS, SRV
records, Happy Eyeballs requirements and algorithm, etc.) are well records, Happy Eyeballs requirements and algorithm, etc.) are well
documented in their respective specifications. documented in their respective specifications.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any actions by IANA. This document does not require any actions by IANA.
skipping to change at page 7, line 38 skipping to change at page 8, line 9
the SIP Forum IPv6 Working Group. This document is based on a lot of the SIP Forum IPv6 Working Group. This document is based on a lot of
tests and discussions at SIPit events, organized by the SIP Forum. tests and discussions at SIPit events, organized by the SIP Forum.
This document has benefited from the expertise and review feedback of This document has benefited from the expertise and review feedback of
many participants of the IETF DISPATCH and SIPCORE WG mailing lists many participants of the IETF DISPATCH and SIPCORE WG mailing lists
as well as those on the SIP Forum IPv6 Task Group mailing list. The as well as those on the SIP Forum IPv6 Task Group mailing list. The
authors wish to specifically call out the efforts and express their authors wish to specifically call out the efforts and express their
gratitude for the detailed and thoughtful comments and corrections of gratitude for the detailed and thoughtful comments and corrections of
Dan Wing, Brett Tate, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef, Carl Klatsky, Mary Barnes, Dan Wing, Brett Tate, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef, Carl Klatsky, Mary Barnes,
Keith Drage, Cullen Jennings, Simon Perreault, Paul Kyzivat, Adam Keith Drage, Cullen Jennings, Simon Perreault, Paul Kyzivat, Adam
Roach, and Richard Barnes. Adam Roach devised the example in Roach, Richard Barnes, Ben Campbell, and Stefan Winter. Adam Roach
Section 4. devised the example in Section 4.
8. Revision History 8. Revision History
[Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this entire section upon [Note to RFC Editor: Please remove this entire section upon
publication as an RFC.] publication as an RFC.]
8.1. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05 to draft-ietf- 8.1. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06 to draft-ietf-
sipcore-dns-dual-stack-07
Update per Ben Campbell's AD evaluation.
Update Vijay Gurbani's affiliation.
Update per Stefan Winter's OPS-DIR review.
8.2. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05 to draft-ietf-
sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06 sipcore-dns-dual-stack-06
Acknowledged Adam Roach for providing the example in Section 4. Acknowledged Adam Roach for providing the example in Section 4.
Correct references to [RFC6157] vs. references to [RFC6724]. Correct references to [RFC6157] vs. references to [RFC6724].
8.2. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04 to draft-ietf- 8.3. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04 to draft-ietf-
sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05 sipcore-dns-dual-stack-05
Simplified the acknowledgments. Simplified the acknowledgments.
Improve wording and punctuation. Improve wording and punctuation.
Rewrote Section 4 based on critiques on the Sipcore list. Included Rewrote Section 4 based on critiques on the Sipcore list. Included
an example by Adam Roach. an example by Adam Roach.
Replaced "RR's" with "records" per suggestion by Jean Mahoney. Replaced "RR's" with "records" per suggestion by Jean Mahoney.
8.3. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03 to draft-ietf- 8.4. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03 to draft-ietf-
sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04 sipcore-dns-dual-stack-04
Changed the "updates" specification to add RFC 3263 and remove RFC Changed the "updates" specification to add RFC 3263 and remove RFC
6157. 6157.
Added Simon Perreault to the acknowledgments. Added Simon Perreault to the acknowledgments.
Minor wording changes. Minor wording changes.
8.4. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-02 to draft-ietf- 8.5. Changes from draft-ietf-sipcore-dns-dual-stack-02 to draft-ietf-
sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03 sipcore-dns-dual-stack-03
Described the relationship to RFC 3263 as "update", since the Described the relationship to RFC 3263 as "update", since the
existing wording in 3263 is not what we want. Arguably, the new existing wording in 3263 is not what we want. Arguably, the new
wording is what was intended in 3263, but the existing wording either wording is what was intended in 3263, but the existing wording either
does not say that or says it in a way that is easily misunderstood. does not say that or says it in a way that is easily misunderstood.
Described the relationship to RFC 6157 as "clarification", since the Described the relationship to RFC 6157 as "clarification", since the
described interaction between 3263 and 6157 appears to be the only described interaction between 3263 and 6157 appears to be the only
reasonable interpretation. reasonable interpretation.
skipping to change at page 10, line 16 skipping to change at page 10, line 44
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002, DOI 10.17487/RFC3261, June 2002,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3261>.
[RFC3484] Draves, R., "Default Address Selection for Internet [RFC3484] Draves, R., "Default Address Selection for Internet
Protocol version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 3484, Protocol version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 3484,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3484, February 2003, DOI 10.17487/RFC3484, February 2003,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3484>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3484>.
[RFC4213] Nordmark, E. and R. Gilligan, "Basic Transition Mechanisms
for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 4213,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4213, October 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4213>.
[RFC6555] Wing, D. and A. Yourtchenko, "Happy Eyeballs: Success with [RFC6555] Wing, D. and A. Yourtchenko, "Happy Eyeballs: Success with
Dual-Stack Hosts", RFC 6555, DOI 10.17487/RFC6555, April Dual-Stack Hosts", RFC 6555, DOI 10.17487/RFC6555, April
2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6555>. 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6555>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Olle E. Johansson Olle E. Johansson
Edvina AB Edvina AB
Runbovaegen 10 Runbovaegen 10
Sollentuna SE-192 48 Sollentuna SE-192 48
skipping to change at page 10, line 44 skipping to change at page 11, line 24
Gonzalo Salgueiro Gonzalo Salgueiro
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
7200-12 Kit Creek Road 7200-12 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
US US
Email: gsalguei@cisco.com Email: gsalguei@cisco.com
Vijay Gurbani Vijay Gurbani
Bell Labs, Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs, Nokia Networks
1960 Lucent Lane 1960 Lucent Lane
Rm 9C-533 Rm 9C-533
Naperville, IL 60563 Naperville, IL 60563
US US
Email: vkg@bell-labs.com Email: vkg@bell-labs.com
Dale R. Worley (editor) Dale R. Worley (editor)
Ariadne Internet Services Ariadne Internet Services
738 Main St. 738 Main St.
Waltham, MA 02451 Waltham, MA 02451
US US
Email: worley@ariadne.com Email: worley@ariadne.com
 End of changes. 22 change blocks. 
62 lines changed or deleted 89 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/