draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-01.txt   draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-02.txt 
Network Working Group Philip J. Nesser II
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-01.txt Nesser & Nesser Consulting
Internet Draft Cleveland Mickles
AOL Time Warner
June 2003
Expires December 2003
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed IPv6 Operations C. Mickles
Internet-Draft
Expires: March 31, 2004 P. Nesser
Nesser & Nesser Consulting
Oct 2003
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Internet Area
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Standards
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-02.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
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 other Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
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://
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 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.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 31, 2004.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract Abstract
This document seeks to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in This document seeks to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in
currently deployed IETF Internet Area documented standards. In order currently deployed IETF Internet Area documented standards. In order
to successfully transition from an all IPv4 Internet to an all IPv6 to successfully transition from an all IPv4 Internet to an all IPv6
Internet, many interim steps will be taken. One of these steps is the Internet, many interim steps will be taken. One of these steps is the
evolution of current protocols that have IPv4 dependencies. It is evolution of current protocols that have IPv4 dependencies. It is
hoped that these protocols (and their implementations) will be hoped that these protocols (and their implementations) will be
redesigned to be network address independent, but failing that will at redesigned to be network address independent, but failing that will
least dually support IPv4 and IPv6. To this end, all Standards (Full, at least dually support IPv4 and IPv6. To this end, all Standards
Draft, and Proposed) as well as Experimental RFCs will be surveyed (Full, Draft, and Proposed) as well as Experimental RFCs will be
and any dependencies will be documented. surveyed and any dependencies will be documented.
1.0 Introduction.............................................02 Table of Contents
2.0 Document Organization....................................03
3.0 Full Standards...........................................03
4.0 Draft Standards..........................................09
5.0 Proposed Standards.......................................13
6.0 Experimental RFCs........................................34
7.0 Summary of Results......................................43
8.0 Security Considerations..................................51
9.0 References...............................................51
10.0 Acknowledgements........................................51
11.0 Author's Addresses......................................52
12.0 Intellectual Property Statement.........................52
13.0 Full Copyright Statement...............................53
1.0 Introduction 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2. Document Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3. Full Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.1 RFC 791 Internet Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2 RFC 792 Internet Control Message Protocol . . . . . . . . 11
3.3 RFC 826 Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol . . . . . . . 11
3.4 RFC 891 DCN Local-Network Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.5 RFC 894 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams
over Ethernet networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.6 RFC 895 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams
over experimental Ethernet networks . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.7 RFC 903 Reverse Address Resolution Protocol . . . . . . . 11
3.8 RFC 919 Broadcasting Internet Datagrams . . . . . . . . . 11
3.9 RFC 922 Broadcasting Internet datagrams in the presence
of subnets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.10 RFC 950 Internet Standard Subnetting Procedure . . . . . . 12
3.11 RFC 1034 Domain Names: Concepts and Facilities . . . . . . 12
3.12 RFC 1035 Domain Names: Implementation and Specification . 13
3.13 RFC 1042 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams
over IEEE 802 networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.14 RFC 1044 Internet Protocol on Network System's
HYPERchannel: Protocol Specification . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.15 RFC 1055 Nonstandard for transmission of IP datagrams
over serial lines: SLIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.16 RFC 1088 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams
over NetBIOS networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.17 RFC 1112 Host Extensions for IP Multicasting . . . . . . . 15
3.18 RFC 1132 Standard for the transmission of 802.2 packets
over IPX networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.19 RFC 1201 Transmitting IP traffic over ARCNET networks . . 15
3.20 RFC 1209 The Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS
Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.21 RFC 1390 Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Networks . . 15
3.22 RFC 1661 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) . . . . . . . . 15
3.23 RFC 1662 PPP in HDLC-like Framing . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.24 RFC 2427 Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay . . . 16
4. Draft Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.1 RFC 951 Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP) . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.2 RFC 1188 Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP
Datagrams over FDDI Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.3 RFC 1191 Path MTU discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.4 RFC 1356 Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN . . . 18
4.5 RFC 1534 Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP . . . . . . 18
4.6 RFC 1542 Clarifications and Extensions for the
Bootstrap Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.7 RFC 1629 Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the
Internet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.8 RFC 1762 The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP) . 18
4.9 RFC 1989 PPP Link Quality Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.10 RFC 1990 The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) . . . . . . . . . 18
4.11 RFC 1994 PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication
Protocol (CHAP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.12 RFC 2067 IP over HIPPI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.13 RFC 2131 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol . . . . . . . 20
4.14 RFC 2132 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions . . . . 20
4.15 RFC 2390 Inverse Address Resolution Protocol . . . . . . . 20
4.16 RFC 2460 Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6)
Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.17 RFC 2461 Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6) . . . 20
4.18 RFC 2462 IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration . . . . 20
4.19 RFC 2463 Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for
the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification . . 20
4.20 RFC 3596 DNS Extensions to support IP version 6 . . . . . 20
5. Proposed Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.1 RFC 1234 Tunneling IPX traffic through IP networks . . . . 21
5.2 RFC 1256 ICMP Router Discovery Messages . . . . . . . . . 22
5.3 RFC 1277 Encoding Network Addresses to Support
Operation over Non-OSI Lower Layers . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.4 RFC 1332 The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol
(IPCP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.5 RFC 1377 The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol
(OSINLCP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.6 RFC 1378 The PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol (ATCP) . . . . 22
5.7 RFC 1469 IP Multicast over Token-Ring Local Area
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.8 RFC 1552 The PPP Internetworking Packet Exchange
Control Protocol (IPXCP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.9 RFC 1570 PPP LCP Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.10 RFC 1598 PPP in X.25 PPP-X25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.11 RFC 1618 PPP over ISDN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.12 RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.13 RFC 1752 The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation
Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.14 RFC 1755 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM . . . . . . 23
5.15 RFC 1763 The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP) . . 23
5.16 RFC 1764 The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP) . . . . 23
5.17 RFC 1973 PPP in Frame Relay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.18 RFC 1981 Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6 . . . . . . . 23
5.19 RFC 1982 Serial Number Arithmetic . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.20 5.21 RFC 1995 Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS . . . . . . 24
5.21 RFC 1996 A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone
Changes (DNS NOTIFY) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.22 RFC 2003 IP Encapsulation within IP . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.23 RFC 2004 Minimal Encapsulation within IP . . . . . . . . . 24
5.24 RFC 2005 Applicability Statement for IP Mobility Support . 24
5.25 RFC 2022 Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based
ATM Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.26 RFC 2043 The PPP SNA Control Protocol (SNACP) . . . . . . 24
5.27 RFC 2097 The PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol (NBFCP) . 24
5.28 RFC 2113 IP Router Alert Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
5.29 RFC 2125 The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Protocol (BAP) /
The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol (BACP) . . . 25
5.30 RFC 2136 Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS
UPDATE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.31 RFC 2181 Clarifications to the DNS Specification . . . . . 25
5.32 RFC 2225 Classical IP and ARP over ATM . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.33 RFC 2226 IP Broadcast over ATM Networks . . . . . . . . . 25
5.34 RFC 2241 DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services . . . 25
5.35 RFC 2242 NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information . . . . . 26
5.36 RFC 2290 Mobile-IPv4 Configuration Option for PPP IPCP . . 26
5.37 RFC 2308 Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS NCACHE) . . 26
5.38 RFC 2331 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM - UNI
Signaling 4.0 Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5.39 RFC 2332 NBMA Next Hop Resolution Protocol (NHRP) . . . . 26
5.40 RFC 2333 NHRP Protocol Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.41 RFC 2335 A Distributed NHRP Service Using SCSP . . . . . . 27
5.42 RFC 2363 PPP Over FUNI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.43 RFC 2364 PPP Over AAL5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.44 RFC 2371 Transaction Internet Protocol Version 3.0
(TIPV3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
5.45 RFC 2464 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.46 RFC 2467 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI Networks . 29
5.47 RFC 2470 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.48 RFC 2472 IP Version 6 over PPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.49 RFC 2473 Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification . 29
5.50 RFC 2484 PPP LCP Internationalization Configuration
Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.51 RFC 2485 DHCP Option for The Open Group's User
Authentication Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.52 RFC 2486 The Network Access Identifier . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.53 RFC 2491 IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA)
networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.54 RFC 2492 IPv6 over ATM Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.55 RFC 2497 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.56 RFC 2507 IP Header Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.57 RFC 2526 Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast Addresses . . . . . 30
5.58 RFC 2529 Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without
Explicit Tunnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.59 RFC 2563 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless
Auto-Configuration in IPv4 Clients . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.60 RFC 2590 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay
Networks Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.61 RFC 2601 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for ATMARP . . . . . 30
5.62 RFC 2602 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for MARS . . . . . . 30
5.63 RFC 2603 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for NHRP . . . . . . 30
5.64 RFC 2610 DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol . . . 30
5.65 RFC 2615 PPP over SONET/SDH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.66 RFC 2625 IP and ARP over Fibre Channel . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.67 RFC 2671 Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0) . . . . . . 31
5.68 RFC 2672 Non-Terminal DNS Name Redirection . . . . . . . . 31
5.69 RFC 2673 Binary Labels in the Domain Name System . . . . . 31
5.70 RFC 2675 IPv6 Jumbograms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.71 RFC 2684 Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM
Adaptation Layer 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.72 RFC 2685 Virtual Private Networks Identifier . . . . . . . 31
5.73 RFC 2686 The Multi-Class Extension to Multi-Link PPP . . . 31
5.74 RFC 2687 PPP in a Real-time Oriented HDLC-like Framing . . 32
5.75 RFC 2688 Integrated Services Mappings for Low Speed
Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.76 RFC 2710 Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 . . . 32
5.77 RFC 2711 IPv6 Router Alert Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.78 RFC 2728 The Transmission of IP Over the Vertical
Blanking Interval of a Television Signal . . . . . . . . . 32
5.79 RFC 2734 IPv4 over IEEE 1394 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.80 RFC 2735 NHRP Support for Virtual Private Networks . . . . 33
5.81 RFC 2765 Stateless IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm (SIIT) . 33
5.82 RFC 2766 Network Address Translation - Protocol
Translation (NAT-PT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.83 RFC 2776 Multicast-Scope Zone Announcement Protocol
(MZAP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.84 RFC 2782 A DNS RR for specifying the location of
services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.85 RFC 2794 Mobile IP Network Access Identifier Extension
for IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.86 RFC 2834 ARP and IP Broadcast over HIPPI-800 . . . . . . . 33
5.87 RFC 2835 IP and ARP over HIPPI-6400 . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.88 RFC 2855 DHCP for IEEE 1394 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.89 RFC 2874 DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address
Aggregation and Renumbering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.90 RFC 2893 Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and
Routers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.91 RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.92 RFC 2937 The Name Service Search Option for DHCP . . . . . 36
5.93 RFC 3004 The User Class Option for DHCP . . . . . . . . . 36
5.94 RFC 3011 The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP . . . . 36
5.95 RFC 3021 Using 31-Bit Prefixes for IPv4 P2P Links . . . . 36
5.96 RFC 3024 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP, revised . . . . 36
5.97 RFC 3046 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option . . . . . . . 36
5.98 RFC 3056 Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds . . . 36
5.99 RFC 3068 An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers . . . . 36
5.100 RFC 3074 DHC Load Balancing Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.101 RFC 3077 A Link-Layer Tunneling Mechanism for
Unidirectional Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.102 RFC 3115 Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific
Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.103 RFC 3145 L2TP Disconnect Cause Information . . . . . . . . 37
5.104 RFC 3344 IP Mobility Support for IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.105 RFC 3376 Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3 . . 37
5.106 RFC 3402 Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
Part Two: The Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.107 RFC 3403 Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
Part Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) Database . . . . 37
5.108 RFC 3404 Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)
Part Four: The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) . . . . 37
5.109 RFC 3513 IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture . . . . . . 37
5.110 RFC 3518 Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Bridging Control
Protocol (BCP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
6. Experimental RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.1 RFC 1149 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams
on avian carriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.2 RFC 1183 New DNS RR Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.3 RFC 1226 Internet protocol encapsulation of AX.25 frames . 39
6.4 RFC 1241 Scheme for an internet encapsulation protocol:
Version 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6.5 RFC 1307 Dynamically Switched Link Control Protocol . . . 39
6.6 RFC 1393 Traceroute Using an IP Option . . . . . . . . . . 40
6.7 RFC 1433 Directed ARP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6.8 RFC 1464 Using the Domain Name System To Store
Arbitrary String Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6.9 RFC 1475 TP/IX: The Next Internet . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
6.10 RFC 1561 Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments . . . . . . 40
6.11 RFC 1712 DNS Encoding of Geographical Location . . . . . . 41
6.12 RFC 1735 NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP) . . . . . 41
6.13 RFC 1768 Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting . . . 42
6.14 RFC 1788 ICMP Domain Name Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
6.15 RFC 1797 Class A Subnet Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
6.16 RFC 1819 Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2)
Protocol Specification - Version ST2+ . . . . . . . . . . 42
6.17 RFC 1868 ARP Extension - UNARP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6.18 RFC 1876 A Means for Expressing Location Information in
the Domain Name System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6.19 RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6.20 RFC 2009 GPS-Based Addressing and Routing . . . . . . . . 43
6.21 RFC 2143 Encapsulating IP with the SCSI . . . . . . . . . 43
6.22 RFC 2345 Domain Names and Company Name Retrieval . . . . . 43
6.23 RFC 2443 A Distributed MARS Service Using SCSP . . . . . . 43
6.24 RFC 2471 IPv6 Testing Address Allocation . . . . . . . . . 44
6.25 RFC 2520 NHRP with Mobile NHCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.26 RFC 2521 ICMP Security Failures Messages . . . . . . . . . 44
6.27 RFC 2540 Detached Domain Name System (DNS) Information . . 44
6.28 RFC 2823 PPP over Simple Data Link (SDL) using
SONET/SDH with ATM-like framing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.29 RFC 3123 A DNS RR Type for Lists of Address Prefixes . . . 44
6.30 RFC 3168 The Addition of Explicit Congestion
Notification (ECN) to IP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.31 RFC 3180 GLOP Addressing in 233/8 . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7. Summary of the Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.1 Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.1.1 RFC 791 Internet Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.1.2 RFC 792 Internet Control Message Protocol . . . . . . . . 45
7.1.3 RFC 891 DCN Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.1.4 RFC 894 IP over Ethernet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.1.5 RFC 895 IP over experimental Ethernets . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.1.6 RFC 922 Broadcasting Internet Datagrams in the Presence
of Subnets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.1.7 RFC 950 Internet Standard Subnetting Procedure . . . . . . 46
7.1.8 RFC 1034 Domain Names: Concepts and Facilities . . . . . . 46
7.1.9 RFC 1035 Domain Names: Implementation and Specification . 46
7.1.10 RFC 1042 IP over IEEE 802 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.1.11 RFC 1044 IP over HyperChannel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.1.12 RFC 1088 IP over NetBIOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.1.13 RFC 1112 Host Extensions for IP Multicast . . . . . . . . 46
7.1.14 RFC 1122 Requirements for Internet Hosts . . . . . . . . . 46
7.1.15 RFC 1201 IP over ARCNET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.1.16 RFC 1209 IP over SMDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.1.17 RFC 1390 Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Networks . . 47
7.2 Draft Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.2.1 RFC 951 Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP) . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.2.2 RFC 1191 Path MTU Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.2.3 RFC 1356 Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN . . . 47
7.2.4 RFC 1990 The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) . . . . . . . . . 47
7.2.5 RFC 2067 IP over HIPPI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.2.6 RFC 2131 DHCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
7.3 Proposed Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.1 RFC 1234 Tunneling IPX over IP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.2 RFC 1256 ICMP Router Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.3 RFC 1277 Encoding Net Addresses to Support Operation
Over Non OSI Lower Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.4 RFC 1332 PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP) . . 48
7.3.5 RFC 1469 IP Multicast over Token Ring . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.6 RFC 2003 IP Encapsulation within IP . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.7 RFC 2004 Minimal Encapsulation within IP . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.8 RFC 2022 Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based
ATM Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.9 RFC 2113 IP Router Alert Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.3.10 RFC 2165 SLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.11 RFC 2225 Classical IP & ARP over ATM . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.12 RFC 2226 IP Broadcast over ATM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.13 RFC 2371 Transaction IPv3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.14 RFC 2625 IP and ARP over Fibre Channel . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.15 RFC 2672 Non-Terminal DNS Redirection . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.16 RFC 2673 Binary Labels in DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.17 IP over Vertical Blanking Interval of a TV Signal (RFC
2728) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.18 RFC 2734 IPv4 over IEEE 1394 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
7.3.19 RFC 2834 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 800 . . . . . . . 49
7.3.20 RFC 2835 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 6400 . . . . . . . 50
7.3.21 RFC 3344 Mobility Support for IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.3.22 RFC 3376 Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3 . . 50
7.4 Experimental RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.4.1 RFC 1393 Traceroute using an IP Option . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.4.2 RFC 1307 Dynamically Switched Link Control Protocol . . . 50
7.4.3 RFC 1735 NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP) . . . . . 50
7.4.4 RFC 1788 ICMP Domain Name Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.4.5 RFC 1868 ARP Extension - UNARP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.4.6 RFC 2143 IP Over SCSI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
7.4.7 RFC 3180 GLOP Addressing in 233/8 . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . 55
This document is part of a document set aiming to document all usage of 1. Introduction
IPv4 addresses in IETF standards. In an effort to have the information
in a manageable form, it has been broken into 7 documents conforming This document is part of a document set aiming to document all usage
to the current IETF areas (Application, Internet, Management & of IPv4 addresses in IETF standards. In an effort to have the
Operations, Routing, Security, Sub-IP and Transport). information in a manageable form, it has been broken into 7 documents
conforming to the current IETF areas (Application, Internet,
Management & Operations, Routing, Security, Sub-IP and Transport).
This specific document focuses on usage of IPv4 addresses within the This specific document focuses on usage of IPv4 addresses within the
Internet area. Internet area.
For a full introduction, please see the intro[1] draft. For a full introduction, please see the introduction [1] document.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
2.0 Document Organization 2. Document Organization
The following sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 each describe the raw analysis The following sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 each describe the raw analysis
of Full, Draft, and Proposed Standards, and Experimental RFCs. Each of Full, Draft, and Proposed Standards, and Experimental RFCs. Each
RFC is discussed in turn starting with RFC 1 and ending with RFC 3247. RFC is discussed in turn starting with RFC 1 and ending in (about)
The comments for each RFC are "raw" in nature. That is, each RFC is RFC 3100. The comments for each RFC are "raw" in nature. That is,
discussed in a vacuum and problems or issues discussed do not "look each RFC is discussed in a vacuum and problems or issues discussed do
ahead" to see if any of the issues raised have already been fixed. not "look ahead" to see if any of the issues raised have already been
fixed.
Section 7 is an analysis of the data presented in Sections 3, 4, 5, Section 7 is an analysis of the data presented in Sections 3, 4, 5,
and 6. It is here that all of the results are considered as a whole and 6. It is here that all of the results are considered as a whole
and the problems that have been resolved in later RFCs are correlated. and the problems that have been resolved in later RFCs are
correlated.
3.0 Full Standards 3. Full Standards
Full Internet Standards (most commonly simply referred to as Full Internet Standards (most commonly simply referred to as
"Standards") are fully mature protocol specification that are widely "Standards") are fully mature protocol specification that are widely
implemented and used throughout the Internet. implemented and used throughout the Internet.
3.01 Internet Protocol. RFC0791, RFC0950, RFC0919, RFC0922, RFC792, 3.1 RFC 791 Internet Protocol
3.01.1 RFC 791 defines IPv4 and will be replaced by the IPv6 This specification defines IPv4 and is replaced by the IPv6
specifications. specifications.
3.01.2 RFC 950 specifies IPv4 subnetting and will be replaced by the 3.2 RFC 792 Internet Control Message Protocol
IPv6 specifications.
3.01.3 RFC 919 is not online and is unavailable for review. This specification defines ICMP, and is inherently IPv4 dependent.
3.01.4 RFC 922 specifies how broadcasts should be treated in the 3.3 RFC 826 Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol
presence of subnets. The techniques of this document will be replaced
by the IPv6 specifications.
3.01.5 RFC 792 defines ICMP. The specification of ICMPv6 will serve There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
as an update.
3.01.6 RFC 1112 defines IP multicast. A similar updated version for 3.4 RFC 891 DCN Local-Network Protocols
IPv6 multicasting must be written.
3.02 Domain Name System. RFC1034, RFC1035 There are many implicit assumptions about the use of IPv4 addresses
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 in this document.
3.02.1 RFC 1034 Domain Concepts and Facilities 3.5 RFC 894 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet
networks
In Section 3.6. Resource Records the definition of A records is: This specification specifically deals with the transmission of IPv4
packets over Ethernet.
RDATA which is the type and sometimes class dependent data 3.6 RFC 895 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over
which describes the resource: experimental Ethernet networks
This specification specifically deals with the transmission of IPv4
packets over experimental Ethernet.
3.7 RFC 903 Reverse Address Resolution Protocol
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
3.8 RFC 919 Broadcasting Internet Datagrams
This specification defines broadcasting for IPv4; IPv6 uses multicast
so this is not applicable.
3.9 RFC 922 Broadcasting Internet datagrams in the presence of subnets
This specification defines how broadcasts should be treated in the
presence of subnets. IPv6 uses multicast so this is not applicable.
3.10 RFC 950 Internet Standard Subnetting Procedure
This specification defines IPv4 subnetting; similar functionality is
part of IPv6 addressing architecture to begin with.
3.11 RFC 1034 Domain Names: Concepts and Facilities
In Section 3.6, "Resource Records", the definition of A record is:
RDATA which is the type and sometimes class dependent
data which describes the resource:
A For the IN class, a 32 bit IP address A For the IN class, a 32 bit IP address
In Section 5.2.1. Typical functions defines And Section 5.2.1, "Typical functions" defines:
1. Host name to host address translation. 1. Host name to host address translation.
This function is often defined to mimic a previous HOSTS.TXT This function is often defined to mimic a previous HOSTS.TXT
based function. Given a character string, the caller wants based function. Given a character string, the caller wants
one or more 32 bit IP addresses. Under the DNS, it one or more 32 bit IP addresses. Under the DNS, it
translates into a request for type A RRs. Since the DNS does translates into a request for type A RRs. Since the DNS does
not preserve the order of RRs, this function may choose to not preserve the order of RRs, this function may choose to
sort the returned addresses or select the "best" address if sort the returned addresses or select the "best" address if
the service returns only one choice to the client. Note that the service returns only one choice to the client. Note that
a multiple address return is recommended, but a single a multiple address return is recommended, but a single
address may be the only way to emulate prior HOSTS.TXT address may be the only way to emulate prior HOSTS.TXT
services. services.
2. Host address to host name translation 2. Host address to host name translation
This function will often follow the form of previous This function will often follow the form of previous
skipping to change at page 10, line ? skipping to change at page 12, line 48
This function will often follow the form of previous This function will often follow the form of previous
functions. Given a 32 bit IP address, the caller wants a functions. Given a 32 bit IP address, the caller wants a
character string. The octets of the IP address are reversed, character string. The octets of the IP address are reversed,
used as name components, and suffixed with "IN-ADDR.ARPA". A used as name components, and suffixed with "IN-ADDR.ARPA". A
type PTR query is used to get the RR with the primary name of type PTR query is used to get the RR with the primary name of
the host. For example, a request for the host name the host. For example, a request for the host name
corresponding to IP address 1.2.3.4 looks for PTR RRs for corresponding to IP address 1.2.3.4 looks for PTR RRs for
domain name "4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA". domain name "4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA".
There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered
throughout the document. There is currently a large debate ongoing throughout the document.
in the DNS community over the use of A6 or AAAA record types for the
resolution of IPv6 addresses. The fact that current A records are
insufficient to support IPv6 is not unknown to the Internet community.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
3.02.2 RFC 1035 DOMAIN NAMES - IMPLEMENTATION AND SPECIFICATION 3.12 RFC 1035 Domain Names: Implementation and Specification
Section 3.4.1. A RDATA format defines the format for A records: Section 3.4.1, "A RDATA format", defines the format for A records:
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ADDRESS | | ADDRESS |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
where: where:
ADDRESS A 32 bit Internet address. ADDRESS A 32 bit Internet address.
Hosts that have multiple Internet addresses will have Hosts that have multiple Internet addresses will have
multiple A records. multiple A records.
A records cause no additional section processing. The A records cause no additional section processing. The
RDATA section of an A line in a master file is an Internet RDATA section of an A line in a master file is an Internet
address expressed as four decimal numbers separated by dots address expressed as four decimal numbers separated by dots
without any imbedded spaces (e.g.,"10.2.0.52" or "192.0.5.6"). without any imbedded spaces (e.g.,"10.2.0.52" or "192.0.5.6").
Section 3.4.2. WKS RDATA format And Section 3.4.2, "WKS RDATA", format is:
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ADDRESS | | ADDRESS |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| PROTOCOL | | | PROTOCOL | |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ | +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ |
| | | |
/ <BIT MAP> / / <BIT MAP> /
/ / / /
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
where: where:
ADDRESS An 32 bit Internet address ADDRESS An 32 bit Internet address
PROTOCOL An 8 bit IP protocol number PROTOCOL An 8 bit IP protocol number
<BIT MAP> A variable length bit map. The bit map <BIT MAP> A variable length bit map. The bit map
skipping to change at page 10, line ? skipping to change at page 14, line 10
The WKS record is used to describe the well known services The WKS record is used to describe the well known services
supported by a particular protocol on a particular internet supported by a particular protocol on a particular internet
address. The PROTOCOL field specifies an IP protocol number, address. The PROTOCOL field specifies an IP protocol number,
and the bit map has one bit per port of the specified protocol. and the bit map has one bit per port of the specified protocol.
The first bit corresponds to port 0, the second to port 1, etc. The first bit corresponds to port 0, the second to port 1, etc.
If the bit map does not include a bit for a protocol of If the bit map does not include a bit for a protocol of
interest, that bit is assumed zero. The appropriate values and interest, that bit is assumed zero. The appropriate values and
mnemonics for ports and protocols are specified in [RFC-1010]. mnemonics for ports and protocols are specified in [RFC-1010].
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
For example, if PROTOCOL=TCP (6), the 26th bit corresponds to For example, if PROTOCOL=TCP (6), the 26th bit corresponds to
TCP port 25 (SMTP). If this bit is set, a SMTP server should be TCP port 25 (SMTP). If this bit is set, a SMTP server should be
listening on TCP port 25; if zero, SMTP service is not supported listening on TCP port 25; if zero, SMTP service is not supported
on the specified address. on the specified address.
The purpose of WKS RRs is to provide availability information for The purpose of WKS RRs is to provide availability information for
servers for TCP and UDP. If a server supports both TCP and UDP, servers for TCP and UDP. If a server supports both TCP and UDP,
or has multiple Internet addresses, then multiple WKS RRs are or has multiple Internet addresses, then multiple WKS RRs are
used. used.
WKS RRs cause no additional section processing. WKS RRs cause no additional section processing.
Section 3.5. IN-ADDR.ARPA domain describe reverse DNS lookups and Section 3.5, "IN-ADDR.ARPA domain", describes reverse DNS lookups and
is clearly IPv4 dependent. is clearly IPv4 dependent.
There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered
throughout the document. throughout the document.
3.03 RFC 894 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over 3.13 RFC 1042 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE
Ethernet networks 802 networks
This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets This specification specifically deals with the transmission of IPv4
over Ethernet. A similar RFC must exist for transmission of IPv6 packets over IEEE 802 networks.
packets.
3.04 RFC 895 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over 3.14 RFC 1044 Internet Protocol on Network System's HYPERchannel:
experimental Ethernet networks Protocol Specification
This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets There are a variety of methods used in this standard to map IPv4
over Ethernet. It is probably unnecessary to provide an updated RFC addresses to 32 bits fields in the HYPERchannel headers. This
because of the unlikelihood of the existence of this layer 2 medium. specification does not support IPv6.
3.05 RFC 1042 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE 3.15 RFC 1055 Nonstandard for transmission of IP datagrams over serial
802 networks lines: SLIP
This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets This specification is more of a analysis of the shortcomings of SLIP
over Ethernet. A similar RFC must exist for transmission of IPv6 which is unsurprising. The introduction of PPP as a general
packets, particularly for 802.5 networks. replacement of SLIP has made this specification essentially unused.
No update need be considered.
3.06 RFC 891 DCN Local-Network Protocols 3.16 RFC 1088 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over NetBIOS
networks
There are many implicit assumptions about the use of IPv4 addresses in This specification documents a technique to encapsulate IP packets
this document. It is unlikely to require any updates since no DCN inside NetBIOS packets.
networks are in existence.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 The technique presented of using NetBIOS names of the form
IP.XX.XX.XX.XX will not work for IPv6 addresses since the length of
IPv6 addresses will not fit within the NetBIOS 15 octet name
limitation.
3.07 RFC 1044 Internet Protocol on Network System's HYPERchannel: 3.17 RFC 1112 Host Extensions for IP Multicasting
Protocol Specification
There are a variety of methods used in this standard to map IPv4 This specification defines IP multicast. Parts of the document are
addresses to 32 bits fields in the HYPERchannel headers. A new IPv4 dependent.
version of the standard will need to be written do support IPv6 on
HYPERchannel networks.
3.08 RFC 1201 Transmitting IP traffic over ARCNET networks 3.18 RFC 1132 Standard for the transmission of 802.2 packets over IPX
networks
The major concerns of this RFC with respect to IPv4 addresses occur There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
in the resolution of ARCnet 8bit addresses to IPv4 addresses in an
"ARPlike" method.
A similar method, very similar to this RFC, would need to be written
to support IPv6 addresses over ARCNET.
3.09 RFC 1055 Nonstandard for transmission of IP datagrams over serial 3.19 RFC 1201 Transmitting IP traffic over ARCNET networks
lines:
SLIP
This RFC is more of a analysis of the shortcomings of SLIP which is The major concerns of this specification with respect to IPv4
unsurprising. The introduction of PPP as a general replacement of SLIP addresses occur in the resolution of ARCnet 8bit addresses to IPv4
has made this protocol essentially unused. No update need be addresses in an "ARPlike" method. This is incompatible with IPv6.
considered.
3.10 RFC 1088 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over 3.20 RFC 1209 The Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service
NetBIOS networks
This RFC documents a technique to encapsulate IP packets inside NetBIOS This specification defines running IPv4 and ARP over SMDS. The
packets. methods described could easily be extended to support IPv6 packets.
The technique presented of using NetBIOS names of the form
IP.XX.XX.XX.XX will not work for IPv6 addresses since the length of
IPv6 addresses will not fit within the NetBIOS 15 octet name
limitation. A new scheme must be invented to similarly encapsulate
IPv6 packets.
3.11 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP). RFC1661, RFC1662 3.21 RFC 1390 Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Networks
3.11.1 RFC 1661 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) This specification defines the use of IPv4 address on FDDI networks.
There are numerous IPv4 dependencies in the specification.
The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) In particular the value of the Protocol Type Code (2048 for IPv4) and
a corresponding Protocol Address length (4 bytes for IPv4) needs to
be created. A discussion of broadcast and multicast addressing
techniques is also included, and similarly must be updated for IPv6
networks. The defined MTU limitation of 4096 octets of data (with
256 octets reserved header space) should remain sufficient for IPv6.
3.11.2 RFC 1662 PPP in HDLC-like Framing 3.22 RFC 1661 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 3.23 RFC 1662 PPP in HDLC-like Framing
3.12 RFC 1209 The Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
This RFC defines running IPv4 and ARP over SMDS. The methods described 3.24 RFC 2427 Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay
could easily be extended to support IPv6 packets, but a new RFC would
be required.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
4.0 Draft Standards 4. Draft Standards
Draft Standards represent the penultimate standard level in the IETF. Draft Standards represent the penultimate standard level in the IETF.
A protocol can only achieve draft standard when there are multiple, A protocol can only achieve draft standard when there are multiple,
independent, interoperable implementations. Draft Standards are independent, interoperable implementations. Draft Standards are
usually quite mature and widely used. usually quite mature and widely used.
4.01 RFC 951 Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP) 4.1 RFC 951 Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP)
This protocol is designed specifically for use with IPv4. A new This protocol is designed specifically for use with IPv4, for
version will be required to support IPv6. For example: example:
Section 3. Packet Format Section 3. Packet Format
All numbers shown are decimal, unless indicated otherwise. The All numbers shown are decimal, unless indicated otherwise. The
BOOTP packet is enclosed in a standard IP [8] UDP [7] datagram. For BOOTP packet is enclosed in a standard IP [8] UDP [7] datagram. For
simplicity it is assumed that the BOOTP packet is never fragmented. simplicity it is assumed that the BOOTP packet is never fragmented.
Any numeric fields shown are packed in 'standard network byte Any numeric fields shown are packed in 'standard network byte
order', i.e. high order bits are sent first. order', i.e. high order bits are sent first.
In the IP header of a bootrequest, the client fills in its own IP In the IP header of a bootrequest, the client fills in its own IP
source address if known, otherwise zero. When the server address is source address if known, otherwise zero. When the server address is
unknown, the IP destination address will be the 'broadcast address' unknown, the IP destination address will be the 'broadcast address'
255.255.255.255. This address means 'broadcast on the local cable, 255.255.255.255. This address means 'broadcast on the local cable,
(I don't know my net number)' [4]. (I don't know my net number)' [4].
...
FIELD BYTES DESCRIPTION FIELD BYTES DESCRIPTION
----- ----- --- ----- ----- ---
...
[...]
ciaddr 4 client IP address; ciaddr 4 client IP address;
filled in by client in bootrequest if known. filled in by client in bootrequest if known.
yiaddr 4 'your' (client) IP address; yiaddr 4 'your' (client) IP address;
filled by server if client doesn't filled by server if client doesn't
know its own address (ciaddr was 0). know its own address (ciaddr was 0).
siaddr 4 server IP address; siaddr 4 server IP address;
returned in bootreply by server. returned in bootreply by server.
giaddr 4 gateway IP address, giaddr 4 gateway IP address,
used in optional cross-gateway booting. used in optional cross-gateway booting.
Since the packet format is a fixed 300 bytes in length, an updated Since the packet format is a fixed 300 bytes in length, an updated
version of the protocol could easily accommodate an additional 48 bytes version of the specification could easily accommodate an additional
(4 IPV6 fields of 16 bytes to replace the existing 4 IPv4 fields of 48 bytes (4 IPv6 fields of 16 bytes to replace the existing 4 IPv4
4 bytes). fields of 4 bytes).
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 4.2 RFC 1188 Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams
over FDDI Networks
4.02 RFC 1191 Path MTU discovery (IP-MTU) This document is clearly informally superceded by RFC 1390,
"Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Networks", even though no
formal deprecation has been done. Therefore, this specification is
not considered further in this memo.
The entire process of PMTU discovery is predicated on the use of the DF 4.3 RFC 1191 Path MTU discovery
bit in the IPv4 header, an ICMP message (also IPv4 dependent) and TCP
MSS option. There clearly needs to an PMTUv6 functionality.
4.03-zzzz RFC 1356 Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN The entire process of PMTU discovery is predicated on the use of the
DF bit in the IPv4 header, an ICMP message (also IPv4 dependent) and
TCP MSS option. This is not compatible with IPv6.
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. 4.4 RFC 1356 Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN
4.04 RFC 1534 Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP (DHCP-BOOTP) Section 3.2 defines an NLPID for IP as follows:
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. The value hex CC (binary 11001100, decimal 204) is IP [6].
Conformance with this specification requires that IP be supported.
See section 5.1 for a diagram of the packet formats.
4.05 RFC 1542 Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol Clearly a new NLPID would need to be defined for IPv6 packets.
There are no new issues other than those presented in Section 4.01 4.5 RFC 1534 Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP
above.
4.06 RFC 1629 Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
(OSI-NSAP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 4.6 RFC 1542 Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol
4.07 RFC 1762 The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP) There are no new issues other than those presented in Section 4.1.
(PPP-DNCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 4.7 RFC 1629 Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet
4.08 RFC 1989 PPP Link Quality Monitoring (PPP-LINK) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 4.8 RFC 1762 The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP)
4.09 RFC 1990 The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) (PPP-MP) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Section 5.1.3. Endpoint Discriminator Option defines a Class header 4.9 RFC 1989 PPP Link Quality Monitoring
field.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
4.10 RFC 1990 The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP)
Section 5.1.3, "Endpoint Discriminator Option", defines a Class
header field:
Class Class
The Class field is one octet and indicates the identifier The Class field is one octet and indicates the identifier
address space. The most up-to-date values of the LCP Endpoint address space. The most up-to-date values of the LCP Endpoint
Discriminator Class field are specified in the most recent Discriminator Class field are specified in the most recent
"Assigned Numbers" RFC [7]. Current values are assigned as "Assigned Numbers" RFC [7]. Current values are assigned as
follows: follows:
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
0 Null Class 0 Null Class
1 Locally Assigned Address 1 Locally Assigned Address
2 Internet Protocol (IP) Address 2 Internet Protocol (IP) Address
3 IEEE 802.1 Globally Assigned MAC Address 3 IEEE 802.1 Globally Assigned MAC Address
4 PPP Magic-Number Block 4 PPP Magic-Number Block
5 Public Switched Network Directory Number 5 Public Switched Network Directory Number
A new class field needs to be defined by the IANA for IPv6 addresses. A new class field needs to be defined by the IANA for IPv6 addresses.
4.10 RFC 1994 PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol 4.11 RFC 1994 PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol (CHAP)
(CHAP) (PPP-CHAP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
4.11 RFC 2067 IP over HIPPI (IP-HIPPI) 4.12 RFC 2067 IP over HIPPI
Section 5.1 Packet Formats contains the following excerpt: Section 5.1, "Packet Formats", contains the following excerpt:
EtherType (16 bits) SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers [8]: EtherType (16 bits) SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers [8]:
IP = 2048 ('0800'h), ARP = 2054 ('0806'h), RARP = 32,821 ('8035'h). IP = 2048 ('0800'h), ARP = 2054 ('0806'h), RARP = 32,821 ('8035'h).
Section 5.5 MTU has the following definition: Section 5.5, "MTU", has the following definition:
The MTU for HIPPI-SC LANs is 65280 bytes. The MTU for HIPPI-SC LANs is 65280 bytes.
This value was selected because it allows the IP packet to fit in This value was selected because it allows the IP packet to fit in
one 64K byte buffer with up to 256 bytes of overhead. The overhead one 64K byte buffer with up to 256 bytes of overhead. The overhead
is 40 bytes at the present time; there are 216 bytes of room for is 40 bytes at the present time; there are 216 bytes of room for
expansion. expansion.
HIPPI-FP Header 8 bytes HIPPI-FP Header 8 bytes
HIPPI-LE Header 24 bytes HIPPI-LE Header 24 bytes
skipping to change at page 11, line 48 skipping to change at page 20, line 4
one 64K byte buffer with up to 256 bytes of overhead. The overhead one 64K byte buffer with up to 256 bytes of overhead. The overhead
is 40 bytes at the present time; there are 216 bytes of room for is 40 bytes at the present time; there are 216 bytes of room for
expansion. expansion.
HIPPI-FP Header 8 bytes HIPPI-FP Header 8 bytes
HIPPI-LE Header 24 bytes HIPPI-LE Header 24 bytes
IEEE 802.2 LLC/SNAP Headers 8 bytes IEEE 802.2 LLC/SNAP Headers 8 bytes
Maximum IP packet size (MTU) 65280 bytes Maximum IP packet size (MTU) 65280 bytes
------------ ------------
Total 65320 bytes (64K - 216) Total 65320 bytes (64K - 216)
This definition is not applicable for IPv6 packets since packets can This definition is not applicable for IPv6 packets since packets can
be larger than the IPv4 limitation of 65280 bytes. be larger than the IPv4 limitation of 65280 bytes.
4.12 RFC 2131 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) 4.13 RFC 2131 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
This version of DHCP is highly assumptive of IPv4. Significant work
on DHCPv6 has been done and is ongoing.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
4.13 RFC 2132 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions (DHCP-BOOTP)
This version of DHCP is highly assumptive of IPv4. Significant work
on DHCPv6 has been done and is ongoing.
4.14-zzzz RFC 2332 NBMA Next Hop Resolution Protocol (NHRP)
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. This version of DHCP is highly assumptive of IPv4. It is not
compatible with IPv6.
4.15-zzzz RFC 2390 Inverse Address Resolution Protocol (IARP) 4.14 RFC 2132 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
4.16-zzzz RFC 2427 Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay 4.15 RFC 2390 Inverse Address Resolution Protocol
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
4.17 RFC 2460 Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification (IPV6) 4.16 RFC 2460 Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification
This document defines IPv6 and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines IPv6 and has no IPv4 issues.
4.18 RFC 2461 Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6) (IPV6-ND) 4.17 RFC 2461 Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6)
This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines an IPv6 related specification and has no IPv4
issues.
4.19 RFC 2462 IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (IPV6-AUTO) 4.18 RFC 2462 IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines an IPv6 related specification and has no IPv4
issues.
4.20 RFC 2463 Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet 4.19 RFC 2463 Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the
Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification (ICMPv6) Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification
This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines an IPv6 related specification and has no IPv4
issues.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 4.20 RFC 3596 DNS Extensions to support IP version 6
5.0 Proposed Standards This specification defines the AAAA record for IPv6 as well as PTR
records using the ip6.arpa domain, and as such has no IPv6 issues.
5. Proposed Standards
Proposed Standards are introductory level documents. There are no Proposed Standards are introductory level documents. There are no
requirements for even a single implementation. In many cases Proposed requirements for even a single implementation. In many cases
are never implemented or advanced in the IETF standards process. They Proposed are never implemented or advanced in the IETF standards
therefore are often just proposed ideas that are presented to the process. They therefore are often just proposed ideas that are
Internet community. Sometimes flaws are exposed or they are one of presented to the Internet community. Sometimes flaws are exposed or
many competing solutions to problems. In these later cases, no they are one of many competing solutions to problems. In these later
discussion is presented as it would not serve the purpose of this cases, no discussion is presented as it would not serve the purpose
discussion. of this discussion.
5.01 RFC 1234 Tunneling IPX traffic through IP networks (IPX-IP) 5.1 RFC 1234 Tunneling IPX traffic through IP networks
The section "Unicast Address Mappings" has the following text: The section "Unicast Address Mappings" has the following text:
For implementations of this memo, the first two octets of the host For implementations of this memo, the first two octets of the host
number will always be zero and the last four octets will be the number will always be zero and the last four octets will be the
node's four octet IP address. This makes address mapping trivial node's four octet IP address. This makes address mapping trivial
for unicast transmissions: the first two octets of the host number for unicast transmissions: the first two octets of the host number
are discarded, leaving the normal four octet IP address. The are discarded, leaving the normal four octet IP address. The
encapsulation code should use this IP address as the destination encapsulation code should use this IP address as the destination
address of the UDP/IP tunnel packet. address of the UDP/IP tunnel packet.
This mapping will not be able to work with IPv6 addresses. This mapping will not be able to work with IPv6 addresses.
There are also numerous discussions on systems keeping a "peer list" There are also numerous discussions on systems keeping a "peer list"
to map between IP and IPX addresses. The specifics are not discussed to map between IP and IPX addresses. The specifics are not discussed
in the document and are left to the individual implementation. in the document and are left to the individual implementation.
The section "Maximum Transmission Unit" The section "Maximum Transmission Unit" also has some implications on
IP addressing:
Although larger IPX packets are possible, the standard maximum Although larger IPX packets are possible, the standard maximum
transmission unit for IPX is 576 octets. Consequently, 576 octets transmission unit for IPX is 576 octets. Consequently, 576 octets
is the recommended default maximum transmission unit for IPX packets is the recommended default maximum transmission unit for IPX packets
being sent with this encapsulation technique. With the eight octet being sent with this encapsulation technique. With the eight octet
UDP header and the 20 octet IP header, the resulting IP packets will UDP header and the 20 octet IP header, the resulting IP packets will
be 604 octets long. Note that this is larger than the 576 octet be 604 octets long. Note that this is larger than the 576 octet
maximum size IP implementations are required to accept [3]. Any IP maximum size IP implementations are required to accept [3]. Any IP
implementation supporting this encapsulation technique must be implementation supporting this encapsulation technique must be
capable of receiving 604 octet IP packets. capable of receiving 604 octet IP packets.
As improvements in protocols and hardware allow for larger, As improvements in protocols and hardware allow for larger,
unfragmented IP transmission units, the 576 octet maximum IPX packet unfragmented IP transmission units, the 576 octet maximum IPX packet
size may become a liability. For this reason, it is recommended size may become a liability. For this reason, it is recommended
that the IPX maximum transmission unit size be configurable in that the IPX maximum transmission unit size be configurable in
implementations of this memo. implementations of this memo.
also has some implications on IP addressing. 5.2 RFC 1256 ICMP Router Discovery Messages
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.02 RFC 1256 ICMP Router Discovery Messages (ICMP-ROUT)
This RFC documents a protocol that is very specific to IPv4 and a
successor will be needed to provide the functionality.
5.03 RFC 1277 Encoding Network Addresses to Support Operation
over Non-OSI Lower Layers
Section 4.5 TCP/IP (RFC 1006) Network Specific Format states:
The IDP and 2 digit prefix identifies a TCP/IP network where RFC 1006
is applied. It is necessary to use an IP Address, as there are
insufficient bits to fit in a domain. It is structured as follows:
__________________________________________________________
|_Digit___||_1-12____|13-17_(optional)_|18-22_(optional)_|_
|_Meaning_||IP_Address_|____port_______|__Transport_Set__|_
For TCP/IP there shall be a 20 digit long network-specific part. This specification defines a mechanism very specific to IPv4.
First 12 digits are for the IP address. The port number can be up to
65535, and needs 5 digits (this is optional, and is defaulted as
defined in RFC 1006). Finally, there is a third part to the address,
which is defined here as ``transport set'' that indicates what kind of
IP-based transport protocols is used. This is a decimal number from
0-65535 which is really a 16-bit flag word. 1 is TCP, 2 is UDP.
Further values of this code are assigned by the IANA. If the transport
set is not there or no bits are set, it means ``default'' which is
TCP. This is encoded in 5 digits.
For example, the IP Address 10.0.0.6 with port 9 over UDP is encoded 5.3 RFC 1277 Encoding Network Addresses to Support Operation over
as: Non-OSI Lower Layers
_______________________________________________________________________ Section 4.5, "TCP/IP (RFC 1006) Network Specific Format" describes a
|Part_____|_|_____IDP_________|___________________DSP__________________| structure that reserves 12 digits for the textual representation of
_ an IP address.
|Component|_|AFI__|___IDI_____|Prefix|___IP_Address____|_Port__|_T_Set_|
_
|Octet____|_|____|____________|_1-2__|______3-14_______|_15-19_|_20-24_|
_
|Value____|T|elex_|007_28722__|__03__|_010_000_000_006_|_00009_|_00002_|
__
|Cncrt_Dec|_|54___|007_28722__|__03__|_010_000_000_006_|_00009_|_00002_|
_
|Cncrt_Bin|_|54___|00_72_87_22_|_03__|01_00_00_00_00_06|00_00_9|0_00_02|
_
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
This 12 octet field for decimal versions of IP addresses is This 12 octet field for decimal versions of IP addresses is
insufficient for a decimal version of IPv6 addresses. It is possible insufficient for a decimal version of IPv6 addresses. It is possible
to define a new encoding using the 20 digit long IP Address + Port + to define a new encoding using the 20 digit long IP Address + Port +
Transport Set fields in order to accommodate a binary version of an Transport Set fields in order to accommodate a binary version of an
IPv6 address, port number and Transport Set. There are several IPv6 address, port number and Transport Set. There are several
schemes that could be envisioned. schemes that could be envisioned.
5.04 RFC 1332 The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP) 5.4 RFC 1332 The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP)
(PPP-IPCP)
This document defines a protocol for devices to assign IPv4 addresses
to PPP clients once PPP negotiation is completed. Section 3. IPCP
Configuration Options defines the following:
The most up-to-date values of the IPCP Option Type field are specified
in the most recent "Assigned Numbers" RFC [6]. Current values are
assigned as follows:
1 IP-Addresses
2 IP-Compression-Protocol
3 IP-Address
3.1. IP-Addresses
Description
The use of the Configuration Option IP-Addresses has been
deprecated. It has been determined through implementation
experience that it is difficult to ensure negotiation convergence
in all cases using this option. RFC 1172 [7] provides
information for implementations requiring backwards
compatibility. The IP-Address Configuration Option replaces
this option, and its use is preferred.
This option should not be sent in a Configure-Request if a
Configure-Request has been received which includes either an IP-
Addresses or IP-Address option. This option MAY be sent if a
Configure-Reject is received for the IP-Address option, or a
Configure-Nak is received with an IP-Addresses option as an
appended option.
Support for this option MAY be removed after the IPCP protocol
status advances to Internet Draft Standard.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
3.3. IP-Address
Description
This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the IP
address to be used on the local end of the link. It allows the
sender of the Configure-Request to state which IP-address is
desired, or to request that the peer provide the information.
The peer can provide this information by NAKing the option, and
returning a valid IP-address.
If negotiation about the remote IP-address is required, and the
peer did not provide the option in its Configure-Request, the
option should be appended to a Configure-Nak. The value of the
IP-address given must be acceptable as the remote IP-address, or
indicate a request that the peer provide the information.
By default, no IP address is assigned.
A summary of the IP-Address Configuration Option format is shown
below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | IP-Address
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP-Address (cont) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type
3
Length
6
IP-Address
The four octet IP-Address is the desired local address of the
sender of a Configure-Request. If all four octets are set to
zero, it indicates a request that the peer provide the IP-Address
information.
Default
No IP address is assigned.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 This specification defines a mechanism for devices to assign IPv4
addresses to PPP clients once PPP negotiation is completed. Section
3, "IPCP Configuration Options", defines IPCP option types which
embed the IP address in 4-byte long fields. This is clearly not
enough for IPv6.
It is clearly designed to allow new Option Types to be added and should However, the specification is clearly designed to allow new Option
offer no problems for use with IPv6 once appropriate options have been Types to be added and Should offer no problems for use with IPv6 once
defined. appropriate options have been defined.
5.05 RFC 1377 The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP) 5.5 RFC 1377 The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP)
(PPP-OSINLC)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.06 RFC 1378 The PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol (ATCP) (PPP-ATCP) 5.6 RFC 1378 The PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol (ATCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.07 RFC 1469 IP Multicast over Token-Ring Local Area Networks 5.7 RFC 1469 IP Multicast over Token-Ring Local Area Networks
(IP-TR-MC)
This document defines the usage of IPv4 multicast over IEEE 802.5 This document defines the usage of IPv4 multicast over IEEE 802.5
Token Ring networks. A new method for IPv6 multicast over these Token Ring networks. This is not compatible with IPv6.
networks will need to be defined.
5.08 RFC 1552 The PPP Internetworking Packet Exchange Control 5.8 RFC 1552 The PPP Internetworking Packet Exchange Control Protocol
Protocol (IPXCP) (IPXCP) (IPXCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.09 RFC 1570 PPP LCP Extensions (PPP-LCP) 5.9 RFC 1570 PPP LCP Extensions
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.10 RFC 1598 PPP in X.25 PPP-X25 5.10 RFC 1598 PPP in X.25 PPP-X25
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.11 RFC 1618 PPP over ISDN (PPP-ISDN)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.11 RFC 1618 PPP over ISDN
5.12 RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission (PPP-TRANS) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.12 RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.13 RFC 1752 The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol 5.13 RFC 1752 The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol
(IPNG)
This document defines a roadmap for IPv6 development and is not This document defines a roadmap for IPv6 development and is not
relevant to this discussion. relevant to this discussion.
5.14 RFC 1755 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM (ATM) 5.14 RFC 1755 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.15 RFC 1763 The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP) (BVCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.16 RFC 1764 The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP) (XNSCP) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.15 RFC 1763 The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP)
5.17 RFC 1886 DNS Extensions to support IP version 6 (DNS-IPV6) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
This RFC defines the AAAA record for IPv6 as well as PTR records 5.16 RFC 1764 The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP)
using the ip6.int domain. There is currently a large debate going
on in the IPv6 and DNS community over the validity of AAAA versus
A6 records.
5.18 RFC 1973 PPP in Frame Relay (PPP-FRAME) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.17 RFC 1973 PPP in Frame Relay
5.19 RFC 1981 Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6 MTU-IPV6 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
This protocol describes an IPv6 related protocol and is not discussed 5.18 RFC 1981 Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6
in this document.
5.20 RFC 1982 Serial Number Arithmetic (SNA) This specification describes an IPv6 related specification and is not
discussed in this document.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.19 RFC 1982 Serial Number Arithmetic
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.21 RFC 1995 Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS (DNS-IZT) 5.20 5.21 RFC 1995 Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS
Although the examples used in this document use IPv4 addresses, Although the examples used in this document use IPv4 addresses,
(i.e. A records) there is nothing in the protocol to preclude (i.e., A records) there is nothing in the specification to preclude
full and proper functionality using IPv6. full and proper functionality using IPv6.
5.22 RFC 1996 A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone Changes (DNS 5.21 RFC 1996 A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone Changes (DNS
NOTIFY) (DNS-NOTIFY) NOTIFY)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.23 RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support (MOBILEIPSU)
This document is designed for use in IPv4 networks. There are
numerous referrals to other IP "support" mechanisms (i.e. ICMP
Router Discover Messages) that specifically refer to the IPv4
of ICMP. An IP Mobility protocol for IPv6 is required.
5.24 RFC 2003 IP Encapsulation within IP (IPENCAPIP) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
This document is designed for use in IPv4 networks. There are 5.22 RFC 2003 IP Encapsulation within IP
many referenced to a specified IP version number of 4 and 32-bit
addresses. An IPv6 Encapsulation within IPv6 is required.
5.25 RFC 2004 Minimal Encapsulation within IP (MINI-IP) This document is designed for use in IPv4 networks. There are many
references to a specified IP version number of 4 and 32-bit
addresses. This is incompatible with IPv6.
This document is designed for use in IPv4 networks. There are 5.23 RFC 2004 Minimal Encapsulation within IP
many referenced to a specified IP version number of 4 and 32-bit
addresses. A Minimal IPv6 Encapsulation within IPv6 is required.
5.26 RFC 2005 Applicability Statement for IP Mobility Support This document is designed for use in IPv4 networks. There are many
references to a specified IP version number of 4 and 32-bit
addresses. This is incompatible with IPv6.
This RFC documents the interoperation of IPv4 mobility as documented 5.24 RFC 2005 Applicability Statement for IP Mobility Support
in the preceding 3 section.
5.27 RFC 2022 Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM This specification documents the interoperation of IPv4 Mobility
Networks (MULTI-UNI) Support; this is not relevant to this discussion.
This protocol specifically maps IPv4 multicast and a new version is 5.25 RFC 2022 Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM Networks
required to support IPv6 multicast.
5.28 RFC 2043 The PPP SNA Control Protocol (SNACP) (PPP-SNACP) This specification specifically maps IPv4 multicast in UNI based ATM
networks. This is incompatible with IPv6.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.26 RFC 2043 The PPP SNA Control Protocol (SNACP)
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.29 RFC 2097 The PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol (NBFCP) 5.27 RFC 2097 The PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol (NBFCP)
(PPP-NBFCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.30 RFC 2113 IP Router Alert Option (ROUT-ALERT) 5.28 RFC 2113 IP Router Alert Option
This document provides a new mechanism for IPv4. It is expected that This document provides a new mechanism for IPv4. This is incompatible
a similar functionality will be included in IPv6. with IPv6.
5.31 RFC 2125 The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Protocol (BAP) / The 5.29 RFC 2125 The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Protocol (BAP) / The PPP
PPP Bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol (BACP) (BAP-BACP) Bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol (BACP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.32 RFC 2136 Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS 5.30 RFC 2136 Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS UPDATE)
UPDATE) (DNS-UPDATE)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.33 RFC 2181 Clarifications to the DNS Specification (DNS-CLAR) 5.31 RFC 2181 Clarifications to the DNS Specification
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. The only reference There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification. The only
to IP addresses discuss the use of any cast address, so it should be reference to IP addresses discuss the use of an anycast address, so
assumed that these mechanisms are IPv6 operable. but one can assume that these techniques are IPv6 operable.
5.34 RFC 2225 Classical IP and ARP over ATM (IP-ATM) 5.32 RFC 2225 Classical IP and ARP over ATM
>From the many references in this document it is clear that this From the many references in this document it is clear that this
document is designed for IPv4 only. It is only later in the document is designed for IPv4 only. It is only later in the document
document that it is implicitly stated, as in: that it is implicitly stated, as in:
ar$spln - length in octets of the source protocol address. Value ar$spln - length in octets of the source protocol address. Value
range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$spln is 4. range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$spln is 4.
ar$tpln - length in octets of the target protocol address. Value ar$tpln - length in octets of the target protocol address. Value
range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$tpln is 4. range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$tpln is 4.
and
and:
For backward compatibility with previous implementations, a null For backward compatibility with previous implementations, a null
IPv4 protocol address may be received with length = 4 and an IPv4 protocol address may be received with length = 4 and an
allocated address in storage set to the value 0.0.0.0. Receiving allocated address in storage set to the value 0.0.0.0. Receiving
stations must be liberal in accepting this format of a null IPv4 stations must be liberal in accepting this format of a null IPv4
address. However, on transmitting an ATMARP or InATMARP packet, a address. However, on transmitting an ATMARP or InATMARP packet, a
null IPv4 address must only be indicated by the length set to zero null IPv4 address must only be indicated by the length set to zero
and must have no storage allocated. and must have no storage allocated.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 5.33 RFC 2226 IP Broadcast over ATM Networks
A new specification for IPv6 must be defined.
5.35 RFC 2226 IP Broadcast over ATM Networks
This document is limited to IPv4 multicasting. A new specification
for IPv6 must be defined.
5.36 RFC 2236 Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2 (IGMP)
This document describes of version of IGMP used for IPv4 multicast. This document is limited to IPv4 multicasting. This is incompatible
A similar methodology for IPv6 multicast needs to be defined. with IPv6.
5.37 RFC 2241 DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services 5.34 RFC 2241 DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services
(DHCP-NDS)
This document defines extensions for the IPv4 only version of This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
DHCP and it is expected that similar options will be present in
DHCPv6.
5.38 RFC 2242 NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information (NETWAREIP) 5.35 RFC 2242 NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information
Once again these are options to the IPv4 version of DHCP. It is This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification, for example:
expected that similar options will for IPv6 will exist in DHCPv6.
PREFERRED_DSS (code 6) PREFERRED_DSS (code 6)
Length is (n * 4) and the value is an array of n IP addresses, Length is (n * 4) and the value is an array of n IP addresses,
each four bytes in length. The maximum number of addresses is 5 each four bytes in length. The maximum number of addresses is 5
and therefore the maximum length value is 20. The list contains and therefore the maximum length value is 20. The list contains
the addresses of n NetWare Domain SAP/RIP Server (DSS). the addresses of n NetWare Domain SAP/RIP Server (DSS).
NEAREST_NWIP_SERVER (code 7) NEAREST_NWIP_SERVER (code 7)
skipping to change at page 21, line 48 skipping to change at page 26, line 26
NEAREST_NWIP_SERVER (code 7) NEAREST_NWIP_SERVER (code 7)
Length is (n * 4) and the value is an array of n IP addresses, Length is (n * 4) and the value is an array of n IP addresses,
each four bytes in length. The maximum number of addresses is 5 each four bytes in length. The maximum number of addresses is 5
and therefore the maximum length value is 20. The list contains and therefore the maximum length value is 20. The list contains
the addresses of n Nearest NetWare/IP servers. the addresses of n Nearest NetWare/IP servers.
PRIMARY_DSS (code 11) PRIMARY_DSS (code 11)
Length of 4, and the value is a single IP address. This field Length of 4, and the value is a single IP address. This field
identifies the Primary Domain SAP/RIP Service server (DSS) for identifies the Primary Domain SAP/RIP Service server (DSS) for
this NetWare/IP domain. NetWare/IP administration utility uses this NetWare/IP domain. NetWare/IP administration utility uses
this value as Primary DSS server when configuring a secondary this value as Primary DSS server when configuring a secondary
DSS server. DSS server.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 5.36 RFC 2290 Mobile-IPv4 Configuration Option for PPP IPCP
5.39 RFC 2290 Mobile-IPv4 Configuration Option for PPP IPCP This document is designed for use with Mobile IPv4. There are
numerous referrals to other IP "support" mechanisms (i.e. ICMP Router
Discover Messages) that specifically refer to the IPv4 of ICMP.
This protocol is IPv4 specific. It is expected that similar 5.37 RFC 2308 Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS NCACHE)
methods will be developed for Mobile IPv6.
5.40 RFC 2308 Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS NCACHE) Although there are numerous examples in this document that use IPv4
(DNS-NCACHE) "A" records, there is nothing in the specification that limits its
effectiveness to IPv4.
Although there are numerous examples in this document that use 5.38 RFC 2331 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM - UNI Signaling 4.0
IPv4 "A" records, there is nothing in the protocol that limits Update
its effectiveness to IPv4.
5.41 RFC 2331 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM - UNI Signaling There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
4.0 Update (UNI-SIG)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.39 RFC 2332 NBMA Next Hop Resolution Protocol (NHRP)
5.42-zzzz RFC 2333 NHRP Protocol Applicability This document is very generic in its design and seems to be able to
support numerous layer 3 addressing schemes and should include both
IPv4 and IPv6.
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. 5.40 RFC 2333 NHRP Protocol Applicability
5.43-zzzz RFC 2335 A Distributed NHRP Service Using SCSP This document is very generic in its design and seems to be able to
support numerous layer 3 addressing schemes and should include both
IPv4 and IPv6.
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. 5.41 RFC 2335 A Distributed NHRP Service Using SCSP
5.44 RFC 2363 PPP Over FUNI (PPP-FUNI) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.42 RFC 2363 PPP Over FUNI
5.45 RFC 2364 PPP Over AAL5 (PPP-AAL) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.43 RFC 2364 PPP Over AAL5
5.46 RFC 2371 Transaction Internet Protocol Version 3.0 TIPV3 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.44 RFC 2371 Transaction Internet Protocol Version 3.0 (TIPV3)
This document states: This document states:
TIP transaction manager addresses take the form: TIP transaction manager addresses take the form:
<hostport><path> <hostport><path>
The <hostport> component comprises: The <hostport> component comprises:
<host>[:<port>] <host>[:<port>]
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
where <host> is either a <dns name> or an <ip address>; and <port> where <host> is either a <dns name> or an <ip address>; and <port>
is a decimal number specifying the port at which the transaction is a decimal number specifying the port at which the transaction
manager (or proxy) is listening for requests to establish TIP manager (or proxy) is listening for requests to establish TIP
connections. If the port number is omitted, the standard TIP port connections. If the port number is omitted, the standard TIP port
number (3372) is used. number (3372) is used.
A <dns name> is a standard name, acceptable to the domain name A <dns name> is a standard name, acceptable to the domain name
service. It must be sufficiently qualified to be useful to the service. It must be sufficiently qualified to be useful to the
receiver of the command. receiver of the command.
An <ip address> is an IP address, in the usual form: four decimal An <ip address> is an IP address, in the usual form: four decimal
numbers separated by period characters. numbers separated by period characters.
and further along it states: And further along it states:
A TIP URL takes the form: A TIP URL takes the form:
tip://<transaction manager address>?<transaction string> tip://<transaction manager address>?<transaction string>
where <transaction manager address> identifies the TIP transaction where <transaction manager address> identifies the TIP transaction
manager (as defined in Section 7 above); and <transaction string> manager (as defined in Section 7 above); and <transaction string>
specifies a transaction identifier, which may take one of two forms specifies a transaction identifier, which may take one of two forms
(standard or non-standard): (standard or non-standard):
i. "urn:" <NID> ":" <NSS> i. "urn:" <NID> ":" <NSS>
A standard transaction identifier, conforming to the proposed A standard transaction identifier, conforming to the proposed
Internet Standard for Uniform Resource Names (URNs), as specified Internet Standard for Uniform Resource Names (URNs), as specified
by RFC2141; where <NID> is the Namespace Identifier, and <NSS> is by RFC2141; where <NID> is the Namespace Identifier, and <NSS> is
the Namespace Specific String. The Namespace ID determines the the Namespace Specific String. The Namespace ID determines the
syntactic interpretation of the Namespace Specific String. The syntactic interpretation of the Namespace Specific String. The
Namespace Specific String is a sequence of characters representing Namespace Specific String is a sequence of characters representin
a transaction identifier (as defined by <NID>). The rules for the a transaction identifier (as defined by <NID>). The rules for the
contents of these fields are specified by [6] (valid characters, contents of these fields are specified by [6] (valid characters,
encoding, etc.). encoding, etc.).
This format of <transaction string> may be used to express global This format of <transaction string> may be used to express global
transaction identifiers in terms of standard representations. transaction identifiers in terms of standard representations.
Examples for <NID> might be <iso> or <xopen>. e.g. Examples for <NID> might be <iso> or <xopen>. e.g.
tip://123.123.123.123/?urn:xopen:xid tip://123.123.123.123/?urn:xopen:xid
Note that Namespace Ids require registration. See [7] for details Note that Namespace Ids require registration. See [7] for details
on how to do this. on how to do this.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
ii. <transaction identifier> ii. <transaction identifier>
A sequence of printable ASCII characters (octets with values in A sequence of printable ASCII characters (octets with values in
the range 32 through 126 inclusive (excluding ":") representing a the range 32 through 126 inclusive (excluding ":") representing a
transaction identifier. In this non-standard case, it is the transaction identifier. In this non-standard case, it is the
combination of <transaction manager address> and <transaction combination of <transaction manager address> and <transaction
identifier> which ensures global uniqueness. e.g. identifier> which ensures global uniqueness. e.g.
tip://123.123.123.123/?transid1 tip://123.123.123.123/?transid1
It is not hard to assume that the production of an updated protocol These are incompatible with IPv6.
specification that supports IPv6 could be accomplished.
5.47 RFC 2373 IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture, 5.45 RFC 2464 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks
This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this This specification documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets
document. over Ethernet and is not considered in this discussion.
5.48 RFC 2374 An IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast Address Format, 5.46 RFC 2467 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI Networks
This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this This specification documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets
document. over FDDI and is not considered in this discussion.
5.49 RFC 2464 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks 5.47 RFC 2470 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring Networks
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This specification documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets
ethernet and is not considered in this discussion. over Token Ring and is not considered in this discussion.
5.50 RFC 2470 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring 5.48 RFC 2472 IP Version 6 over PPP
Networks
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This specification documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets
token ring and is not considered in this discussion. over PPP and is not considered in this discussion.
5.51 RFC 2472 IP Version 6 over PPP (IPv6-PPP) 5.49 RFC 2473 Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This specification documents an IPv6 aware specification and is not
PPP and is not considered in this discussion. considered in this discussion.
5.52 RFC 2473 Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification 5.50 RFC 2484 PPP LCP Internationalization Configuration Option
This RFC documents an IPv6 aware protocol and is not considered There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
in this discussion.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 5.51 RFC 2485 DHCP Option for The Open Group's User Authentication
Protocol
5.53 RFC 2484 PPP LCP Internationalization Configuration Option This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.52 RFC 2486 The Network Access Identifier
5.54 RFC 2485 DHCP Option for The Open Group's User There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Authentication Protocol
This document defines extensions for the IPv4 only version of 5.53 RFC 2491 IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) networks
DHCP and it is expected that similar options will be present in
DHCPv6.
5.55 RFC 2486 The Network Access Identifier (NAI) This specification documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets
over NBMA networks and is not considered in this discussion.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.54 RFC 2492 IPv6 over ATM Networks
5.56 RFC 2491 IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access This specification documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets
(NBMA) networks (IPv6-NBMA) over ATM networks and is not considered in this discussion.
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over 5.55 RFC 2497 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet Networks
NBMA networks and is not considered in this discussion.
5.57 RFC 2492 IPv6 over ATM Networks (IPv6ATMNET) This specification documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets
over ARCnet networks and is not considered in this discussion.
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over 5.56 RFC 2507 IP Header Compression
ATM networks and is not considered in this discussion.
5.58 RFC 2497 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware.
Networks
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over 5.57 RFC 2526 Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast Addresses
ARCnet networks and is not considered in this discussion.
5.59 RFC 2507 IP Header Compression This specification documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in
this document.
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware. 5.58 RFC 2529 Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without Explicit
Tunnels
5.60 RFC 2526 Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast Addresses This specification documents IPv6 transmission methods and is not
discussed in this document.
This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this 5.59 RFC 2563 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Auto-Configuration in
document. IPv4 Clients
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
5.61 RFC 2529 Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without 5.60 RFC 2590 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks
Explicit Tunnels Specification
This RFC documents IPv6 transmission methods and is not discussed This specification documents IPv6 transmission method over Frame
in this document. Relay and is not discussed in this document.
5.62 RFC 2563 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Auto-Configuration 5.61 RFC 2601 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for ATMARP
in IPv4 Clients
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware.
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.63 RFC 2590 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay 5.62 RFC 2602 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for MARS
Networks Specification
This RFC documents IPv6 transmission method over Frame Relay and is This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware.
not discussed in this document.
5.64-zzzz RFC 2601 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for ATMARP 5.63 RFC 2603 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for NHRP
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware.
5.65-zzzz RFC 2602 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for MARS 5.64 RFC 2610 DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
5.66-zzzz RFC 2603 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for NHRP 5.65 RFC 2615 PPP over SONET/SDH
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.67 RFC 2610 DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol 5.66 RFC 2625 IP and ARP over Fibre Channel
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This document states:
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.68 RFC 2615 PPP over SONET/SDH Objective and Scope:
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. The major objective of this specification is to promote
interoperable implementations of IPv4 over FC. This specification
describes a method for encapsulating IPv4 and Address Resolution
Protocol (ARP) packets over FC.
5.69 RFC 2671 Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0) (EDNS0) This is incompatible with IPv6.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.67 RFC 2671 Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.70 RFC 2672 Non-Terminal DNS Name Redirection 5.68 RFC 2672 Non-Terminal DNS Name Redirection
This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. A similar This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. An IPv6
specification for IPv6 addresses should be defined. specification may be needed.
5.71 RFC 2673 Binary Labels in the Domain Name System (DNS) 5.69 RFC 2673 Binary Labels in the Domain Name System
This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. A similar This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. An IPv6
specification for IPv6 addresses should be defined. specification may be needed.
5.72 RFC 2675 IPv6 Jumbograms 5.70 RFC 2675 IPv6 Jumbograms
This document defines a IPv6 packet format and is therefore not This document defines a IPv6 packet format and is therefore not
discussed in this document. discussed in this document.
5.73-zzzz RFC 2684 Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation 5.71 RFC 2684 Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation Layer 5
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.74 RFC 2686 The Multi-Class Extension to Multi-Link PPP 5.72 RFC 2685 Virtual Private Networks Identifier
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.75 RFC 2687 PPP in a Real-time Oriented HDLC-like Framing 5.73 RFC 2686 The Multi-Class Extension to Multi-Link PPP
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.76 RFC 2688 Integrated Services Mappings for Low Speed Networks 5.74 RFC 2687 PPP in a Real-time Oriented HDLC-like Framing
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.77 RFC 2710 Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 5.75 RFC 2688 Integrated Services Mappings for Low Speed Networks
(MLD-IPv6)
This document defines an IPv6 specific protocol and is not discussed There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
in this document.
5.78 RFC 2711 IPv6 Router Alert Option 5.76 RFC 2710 Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6
This document defines an IPv6 specific protocol and is not discussed This document defines an IPv6 specific specification and is not
in this document. discussed in this document.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 5.77 RFC 2711 IPv6 Router Alert Option
5.79 RFC 2728 The Transmission of IP Over the Vertical Blanking This document defines an IPv6 specific specification and is not
Interval of a Television Signal discussed in this document.
5.78 RFC 2728 The Transmission of IP Over the Vertical Blanking Interval
of a Television Signal
The following data format is defined: The following data format is defined:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| group | uncompressed IP header (20 bytes) | |0| group | uncompressed IP header (20 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +
| | | |
: .... : : .... :
skipping to change at page 28, line 32 skipping to change at page 32, line 48
| | | |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | payload (<1472 bytes) | | | payload (<1472 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +
| | | |
: .... : : .... :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| CRC | | CRC |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This protocol is IPv4 dependent. Updates must be made to support This is incompatible with IPv6.
IPv6.
5.80 RFC 2734 IPv4 over IEEE 1394 5.79 RFC 2734 IPv4 over IEEE 1394
This protocol is IPv4 only. A similar document must be defined for This specification is IPv4 only.
IPv6.
5.81-zzzz RFC 2735 NHRP Support for Virtual Private Networks 5.80 RFC 2735 NHRP Support for Virtual Private Networks
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. This specification implies only IPv4 operations, but does not seem to
present any reason that it would not function for IPv6.
5.82 RFC 2765 Stateless IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm (SIIT) 5.81 RFC 2765 Stateless IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm (SIIT)
(SIIT)
This protocol defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not This specification defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not
discussed in this document. discussed in this document.
5.83 RFC 2766 Network Address Translation - Protocol 5.82 RFC 2766 Network Address Translation - Protocol Translation
Translation (NAT-PT) (NAT-PT) (NAT-PT)
This protocol defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not This specification defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not
discussed in this document. discussed in this document.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 5.83 RFC 2776 Multicast-Scope Zone Announcement Protocol (MZAP)
5.84 RFC 2776 Multicast-Scope Zone Announcement Protocol (MZAP)
(MZAP)
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
5.85 RFC 2782 A DNS RR for specifying the location of services 5.84 RFC 2782 A DNS RR for specifying the location of services
(DNS-SRV)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
5.86 RFC 2794 Mobile IP Network Access Identifier Extension for 5.85 RFC 2794 Mobile IP Network Access Identifier Extension for IPv4
IPv4
This document defines an IPv4 specific protocol and a similar This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
functionality must be defined for Mobile IPv6.
5.87 RFC 2834 ARP and IP Broadcast over HIPPI-800 5.86 RFC 2834 ARP and IP Broadcast over HIPPI-800
This document uses the generic term "IP Address" in the text but This document uses the generic term "IP Address" in the text but it
it also contains the text: also contains the text:
The HARP message has several fields that have the following format The HARP message has several fields that have the following format
and values: and values:
Data sizes and field meaning: Data sizes and field meaning:
ar$hrd 16 bits Hardware type ar$hrd 16 bits Hardware type
ar$pro 16 bits Protocol type of the protocol fields below ar$pro 16 bits Protocol type of the protocol fields below
ar$op 16 bits Operation code (request, reply, or NAK) ar$op 16 bits Operation code (request, reply, or NAK)
ar$pln 8 bits byte length of each protocol address ar$pln 8 bits byte length of each protocol address
ar$rhl 8 bits requester's HIPPI hardware address length (q) ar$rhl 8 bits requester's HIPPI hardware address length (q)
skipping to change at page 30, line 4 skipping to change at page 34, line 31
ar$hrd - SHALL contain 28. (HIPARP) ar$hrd - SHALL contain 28. (HIPARP)
ar$pro - SHALL contain the IP protocol code 2048 (decimal). ar$pro - SHALL contain the IP protocol code 2048 (decimal).
ar$op - SHALL contain the operational value (decimal): ar$op - SHALL contain the operational value (decimal):
1 for HARP_REQUESTs 1 for HARP_REQUESTs
2 for HARP_REPLYs 2 for HARP_REPLYs
8 for InHARP_REQUESTs 8 for InHARP_REQUESTs
9 for InHARP_REPLYs 9 for InHARP_REPLYs
10 for HARP_NAK 10 for HARP_NAK
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
ar$pln - SHALL contain 4. ar$pln - SHALL contain 4.
and later: And later:
31 28 23 21 15 10 7 2 0 31 28 23 21 15 10 7 2 0
+-----+---------+-+-+-----------+---------+-----+---------+-----+ +-----+---------+-+-+-----------+---------+-----+---------+-----+
0 | 04 |1|0| 000 | 03 | 0 | 0 | 04 |1|0| 000 | 03 | 0 |
+---------------+-+-+---------------------+---------------+-----+ +---------------+-+-+---------------------+---------------+-----+
1 | 45 | 1 | 45 |
+-----+-+-------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ +-----+-+-------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
2 |[LA] |W|MsgT= 0| 000 | Dest. Switch Addr | 2 |[LA] |W|MsgT= 0| 000 | Dest. Switch Addr |
+-----+-+-------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ +-----+-+-------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
3 | 2 | 2 | 000 | Source Switch Addr | 3 | 2 | 2 | 000 | Source Switch Addr |
skipping to change at page 30, line 53 skipping to change at page 35, line 29
+-----------------------------------------------+---------------+ +-----------------------------------------------+---------------+
16 | Requester HW Address bytes 7 - q | Tgt HW byte 0 | 16 | Requester HW Address bytes 7 - q | Tgt HW byte 0 |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
17 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 1 - 4 | 17 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 1 - 4 |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+ +---------------------------------------------------------------+
18 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 5 - 8 | 18 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 5 - 8 |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
19 |Tgt HW byte 9-x| FILL | FILL | FILL | 19 |Tgt HW byte 9-x| FILL | FILL | FILL |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
HARP - InHARP Message HARP - InHARP Message
Which make this protocol only IPv4 aware. An update is required to
support IPv6.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 This is incompatible with IPv6.
5.88 RFC 2835 IP and ARP over HIPPI-6400 (GSN) (GSN) 5.87 RFC 2835 IP and ARP over HIPPI-6400
This document states: This document states:
The Ethertype value SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers [18]: The Ethertype value SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers
[18]:
IP 0x0800 2048 (16 bits) IP 0x0800 2048 (16 bits)
This is IPv4 limited and as expected (after reviewing the previous This is limited to IPv4, and similar to the previous section,
section) requires an update to support IPv6. There are numerous other incompatible with IPv6. There are numerous other points in the
points in the documents that confirms this assumption. documents that confirm this assumption.
5.89 RFC 2855 DHCP for IEEE 1394
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that 5.88 RFC 2855 DHCP for IEEE 1394
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.90 RFC 2874 DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
and Renumbering
This document defines a protocol to interact with IPv6 and is not 5.89 RFC 2874 DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation and
considered in this document. Renumbering
This document defines a specification to interact with IPv6 and is
not considered in this document.
5.91 RFC 2893 Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers 5.90 RFC 2893 Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers
(TRANS-IPV6)
This document defines a transition mechanism for IPv6 and is not This document defines a transition mechanism for IPv6 and is not
considered in this document. considered in this document.
5.92 RFC 2915 The Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR) DNS Resource 5.91 RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS
Record (NAPTR)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.93 RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.94 RFC 2937 The Name Service Search Option for DHCP There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that 5.92 RFC 2937 The Name Service Search Option for DHCP
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
5.95 RFC 3004 The User Class Option for DHCP 5.93 RFC 3004 The User Class Option for DHCP
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.96 RFC 3011 The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP 5.94 RFC 3011 The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP
This document is specifically designed for IPv4. This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
5.97 RFC 3021 Using 31-Bit Prefixes on IPv4 Point-to-Point Links 5.95 RFC 3021 Using 31-Bit Prefixes for IPv4 P2P Links
This document is IPv4 specific and a similar technique could also This specification is specific to IPv4 address architecture, where a
be defined for IPv6. modification was needed to use both addresses of a 31-bit prefix.
This is possible by IPv6 address architecture, but in most cases not
recommended; see RFC 3627, Use of /127 Prefix Length Between Routers
Considered Harmful.
5.98 RFC 3024 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP, revised 5.96 RFC 3024 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP, revised
This protocol assumes IPv4 addressing. An updated Mobile IPv6 This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
specification should include this functionality.
5.99 RFC 3046 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option 5.97 RFC 3046 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.100 RFC 3056 Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds 5.98 RFC 3056 Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
5.101 RFC 3068 An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers 5.99 RFC 3068 An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
5.102 RFC 3074 DHC Load Balancing Algorithm 5.100 RFC 3074 DHC Load Balancing Algorithm
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.103 RFC 3077 A Link-Layer Tunneling Mechanism for Unidirectional There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Links
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. 5.101 RFC 3077 A Link-Layer Tunneling Mechanism for Unidirectional Links
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
5.104 RFC 3115 Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific Extensions 5.102 RFC 3115 Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific Extensions
This is an enhancement for Mobile IPv4. It is expected that a This is an extension to an IPv4-only specification.
similar capability will be in Mobile IPv6.
5.105 RFC 3145 L2TP Disconnect Cause Information 5.103 RFC 3145 L2TP Disconnect Cause Information
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 5.104 RFC 3344 IP Mobility Support for IPv4
6.0 Experimental RFCs There are IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Experimental RFCs typically define protocols that do not have widescale 5.105 RFC 3376 Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3
implementation or usage on the Internet. They are often propriety in
nature or used in limited arenas. They are documented to the Internet
community in order to allow potential interoperability or some other
potential useful scenario. In a few cases they are presented as
alternatives to the mainstream solution to an acknowledged problem.
6.01 RFC 1183 New DNS RR Definitions (DNS-RR) This document describes of version of IGMP used for IPv4 multicast.
This is not compatible with IPv6.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.106 RFC 3402 Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Two: The
Algorithm
6.02 RFC 1226 Internet protocol encapsulation of AX.25 frames There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
(IP-AX.25)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.107 RFC 3403 Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Three:
The Domain Name System (DNS) Database
6.03 RFC 1241 Scheme for an internet encapsulation protocol: Version There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
1 (IN-ENCAP)
This protocol specifies a protocol that assumes IPv4 but does not 5.108 RFC 3404 Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Four:
actually have any limitations which would limit its operation in The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)
an IPv6 environment.
6.04 RFC 1393 Traceroute Using an IP Option (TRACE-IP) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
This document uses an IPv4 option. It is therefore limited to IPv4 5.109 RFC 3513 IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture
networks. A different technique must be developed for IPv6.
6.05 RFC 1433 Directed ARP (DIR-ARP) This specification documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in
this document.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.110 RFC 3518 Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Bridging Control Protocol
(BCP)
6.06 RFC 1464 Using the Domain Name System To Store Arbitrary String There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Attributes
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 6. Experimental RFCs
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 Experimental RFCs typically define protocols that do not have
widescale implementation or usage on the Internet. They are often
propriety in nature or used in limited arenas. They are documented
to the Internet community in order to allow potential
interoperability or some other potential useful scenario. In a few
cases they are presented as alternatives to the mainstream solution
to an acknowledged problem.
6.07 RFC 1475 TP/IX: The Next Internet (TP-IX) 6.1 RFC 1149 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams on avian
carriers
This document defines IPv7 and has been abandoned by the IETF as a There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification. In fact the
feasible design. It is not considered in this document. flexibility of this specification is such that all versions of IP
should function within its boundaries, presuming that the packets
remain small enough to be transmitted with the 256 milligrams weight
limitations.
6.08 RFC 1561 Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments (CLNP-TUBA) 6.2 RFC 1183 New DNS RR Definitions
This document defines the use of NSAPA addressing and does not There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
use any version of IP, so there are no IPv4 dependencies in this
protocol.
6.09 RFC 1712 DNS Encoding of Geographical Location (DNS-ENCODE) 6.3 RFC 1226 Internet protocol encapsulation of AX.25 frames
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
6.10 RFC 1735 NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP) (NARP) 6.4 RFC 1241 Scheme for an internet encapsulation protocol: Version 1
This document defines a protocol that is IPv4 specific. A new This specification defines a specification that assumes IPv4 but does
version would need to be documented to support IPv6. not actually have any limitations which would limit its operation in
an IPv6 environment.
4. Packet Formats 6.5 RFC 1307 Dynamically Switched Link Control Protocol
NARP requests and replies are carried in IP packets as protocol type This specification is IPv4 dependent, for example:
54. This section describes the packet formats of NARP requests and
replies:
NARP Request 3.1 Control Message Format
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Version | Hop Count | Checksum | | Identifier | Total length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Unused |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| NBMA length | NBMA address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| (variable length) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Source and Destination IP Addresses
Respectively, these are the IP addresses of the NARP requestor and
the target terminal for which the NBMA address is desired.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
and
NARP Reply
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Version | Hop Count | Checksum | | Function | Event Status |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Unused | | Endpoint 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination IP address | | Endpoint 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source IP address | | Message |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| NBMA length | NBMA address | | Body |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| (variable length) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Source and Destination IP Address Endpoint addresses: 32 bits each
Respectively, these are the IP addresses of the NARP requestor and
the target terminal for which the NBMA address is desired.
6.11 RFC 1768 Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting (CLNP-MULT)
This document defines an IPv9 multicast protocol and has been
abandoned by the IETF as a feasible design. It is not considered in
this document.
6.12 RFC 1788 ICMP Domain Name Messages (ICMP-DM) The internet addresses of the two communicating parties for
which the link is being prepared.
This protocol is used for updates to the in-addr.arp reverse DNS 6.6 RFC 1393 Traceroute Using an IP Option
maps, and is limited to IPv4.
6.13 RFC 1797 Class A Subnet Experiment This document uses an IPv4 option. It is therefore limited to IPv4
networks, and is incompatible with IPv6.
This document is specific to IPv4. 6.7 RFC 1433 Directed ARP
6.14 RFC 1819 Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2) Protocol There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Specification - Version ST2+ (ST2)
This protocol is IPv4 limited. In fact it is the definition of 6.8 RFC 1464 Using the Domain Name System To Store Arbitrary String
IPv5. See below. Attributes
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Both ST2 and IP apply the same addressing schemes to identify 6.9 RFC 1475 TP/IX: The Next Internet
different hosts. ST2 and IP packets differ in the first four bits,
which contain the internetwork protocol version number: number 5 is
reserved for ST2 (IP itself has version number 4). As a network
layer protocol, like IP, ST2 operates independently of its
underlying subnets. Existing implementations use ARP for address
resolution, and use the same Layer 2 SAPs as IP.
8.2 Group Name Generator This document defines IPv7 and has been abandoned by the IETF as a
feasible design. It is not considered in this document.
GroupName generation is similar to Stream ID generation. The 6.10 RFC 1561 Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments
GroupName includes a 16-bit unique identifier, a 32-bit creation
timestamp, and a 32-bit IP address. Group names are globally unique.
A GroupName includes the creator's IP address, so this reduces a
global uniqueness problem to a simple local problem.
IP-encapsulated ST packets begin with a normal IP header. Most This document defines the use of NSAP addressing and does not use any
fields of the IP header should be filled in according to the same version of IP, so there are no IPv4 dependencies in this
rules that apply to any other IP packet. Three fields of special specification.
interest are:
o Protocol is 5, see [RFC1700], to indicate an ST packet is enclosed, 6.11 RFC 1712 DNS Encoding of Geographical Location
as opposed to TCP or UDP, for example.
and There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
The following permanent IP multicast addresses have been assigned to 6.12 RFC 1735 NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP)
ST:
224.0.0.7 All ST routers (intermediate agents) This document defines a specification that is IPv4 specific, for
224.0.0.8 All ST hosts (agents) example:
In addition, a block of transient IP multicast addresses, 4. Packet Formats
224.1.0.0 -224.1.255.255, has been allocated for ST multicast
groups. For instance, the following two functions could be made
available:
The ST Header also includes an ST Version Number, a total length NARP requests and replies are carried in IP packets as protocol type
field, a header checksum, a unique id, and the stream origin 32-bit 54. This section describes the packet formats of NARP requests and
IP address. The unique id and the stream origin 32-bit IP address replies:
form the stream id (SID). This is shown in Figure 10. Please refer
to Section 10.6 for an explanation of the notation.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 NARP Request
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ST=5 | Ver=3 |D| Pri | 0 | TotalBytes | | Version | Hop Count | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| HeaderChecksum | UniqueID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OriginIPAddress |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 10: ST Header
o ST is the IP Version Number assigned to identify ST packets. The
value for ST is 5.
o OriginIPAddress is the second element of the SID. It is the 32-bit
IP address of the stream origin, see Section 8.1.
10.3.2 Group
The Group parameter (PCode = 2) is an optional argument used to
indicate that the stream is a member in the specified group.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCode = 2 | PBytes = 16 | GroupUniqueID | | Type | Code | Unused |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| GroupCreationTime | | Destination IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| GroupInitiatorIPAddress | | Source IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Relationship | N | | NBMA length | NBMA address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| (variable length) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 13: Group Parameter Source and Destination IP Addresses
Respectively, these are the IP addresses of the NARP requestor
o GroupUniqueID, GroupInitiatorIPAddress, and GroupCreationTime and the target terminal for which the NBMA address is desired.
together form the GroupName field. They are allocated by the group
name generator function, see Section 8.2. GroupUniqueID and
GroupCreationTime are implementation specific and have only local
definitions.
10.3.3 MulticastAddress
The MulticastAddress parameter (PCode = 3) is an optional parameter And:
that is used when using IP encapsulation and setting up an IP
multicast group. This parameter is used to communicate the desired
IP multicast address to next-hop ST agents that should become
members of the group, see Section 8.8.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 NARP Reply
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCode = 3 | PBytes = 8 | 0 | | Version | Hop Count | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPMulticastAddress |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 15: MulticastAddress
o IPMulticastAddress is the 32-bit IP multicast address to be used
to receive data packets for the stream.
10.3.5 RecordRoute
The RecordRoute parameter (PCode = 5) is used to request that the
route between the origin and a target be recorded and delivered to
the user application. The ST agent at the origin (or target)
including this parameter, has to determine the parameter's length,
indicated by the PBytes field. ST agents processing messages
containing this parameter add their receiving IP address in the
position indicated by the FreeOffset field, space permitting. If no
space is available, the parameter is passed unchanged. When included
by the origin, all agents between the origin and the target add
their IP addresses and this information is made available to the
application at the target. When included by the target, all agents
between the target and the origin, inclusive, add their IP addresses
and this information is made available to the application at the
origin.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCode = 5 | PBytes | 0 | FreeOffset | | Type | Code | Unused |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IP Address 1 | | Destination IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: ... : | Source IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IP Address N | | NBMA length | NBMA address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| (variable length) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 17: RecordRoute Source and Destination IP Address
Respectively, these are the IP addresses of the NARP requestor
and the target terminal for which the NBMA address is desired.
o PBytes is the length of the parameter in bytes. Length is This is incompatible with IPv6.
determined by the agent (target or origin) that first introduces
the parameter. Once set, the length of the parameter remains
unchanged.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 6.13 RFC 1768 Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting
o FreeOffset indicates the offset, relative to the start of the This specification defines multicasting for CLNP, which is not an IP
parameter, for the next IP address to be recorded. When the protocol, and therefore has no IPv4 dependencies.
FreeOffset is greater than, or equal to, PBytes the RecordRoute
parameter is full.
o IP Address is filled in, space permitting, by each ST agent 6.14 RFC 1788 ICMP Domain Name Messages
processing this parameter.
10.3.6 Target and TargetList This specification is used for updates to the in-addr.arpa reverse
DNS maps, and is limited to IPv4.
Several control messages use a parameter called TargetList (PCode = 6.15 RFC 1797 Class A Subnet Experiment
6), which contains information about the targets to which the
message pertains. For each Target in the TargetList, the information
includes the 32-bit IP address of the target, the SAP applicable to
the next higher layer protocol, and the length of the SAP
(SAPBytes). Consequently, a Target structure can be of variable
length. Each entry has the format shown in Figure 18.
0 1 2 3 This document is specific to IPv4 address architecture, and as such,
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 has no IPv6 dependencies.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Target IP Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TargetBytes | SAPBytes | SAP : Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 18: Target 6.16 RFC 1819 Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2) Protocol
Specification - Version ST2+
There are many other examples, but it does not serve any purpose to This specification is IPv4 limited. In fact it is the definition of
include them all. IPv5. It has been abandoned by the IETF as feasible design, and is
not considered in this discussion.
6.15 RFC 1868 ARP Extension - UNARP (UNARP) 6.17 RFC 1868 ARP Extension - UNARP
This protocol specifies IPv4 ARP. It is expected that a similar This specification defines an extension to IPv4 ARP to delete entries
method should be implemented in IPv6. from ARP caches on a link.
6.16 RFC 1876 A Means for Expressing Location Information in the 6.18 RFC 1876 A Means for Expressing Location Information in the Domain
Domain Name System (DNS-LOC) Name System
This document defines a methodology for applying this technology This document defines a methodology for applying this technology
which is IPv4 dependent. The protocol itself has no IPv4 which is IPv4 dependent. The specification itself has no IPv4
dependencies. dependencies.
6.17 RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 6.19 RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 6.20 RFC 2009 GPS-Based Addressing and Routing
6.18 RFC 2009 GPS-Based Addressing and Routing (GPS-AR)
The document states: The document states:
The future version of IP (IP v6) will certainly have a sufficient The future version of IP (IP v6) will certainly have a sufficient
number of bits in its addressing space to provide an address for number of bits in its addressing space to provide an address for
even smaller GPS addressable units. In this proposal, however, we even smaller GPS addressable units. In this proposal, however, we
assume the current version of IP (IP v4) and we make sure that we assume the current version of IP (IP v4) and we make sure that we
manage the addressing space more economically than that. We will manage the addressing space more economically than that. We will
call the smallest GPS addressable unit a GPS-square. call the smallest GPS addressable unit a GPS-square.
6.19 RFC 2143 Encapsulating IP with the Small Computer System This specification does not seem to have real IPv4 dependencies.
Interface (IP-SCSI)
This protocol will only operate using IPv4. As stated in the 6.21 RFC 2143 Encapsulating IP with the SCSI
This specification will only operate using IPv4. As stated in the
document: document:
It was decided that the ten byte header offers the greatest It was decided that the ten byte header offers the greatest
flexibility for encapsulating version 4 IP datagrams for the flexibility for encapsulating version 4 IP datagrams for the
following reasons: following reasons: [...]
6.20 RFC 2345 Domain Names and Company Name Retrieval This is incompatible with IPv6.
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 6.22 RFC 2345 Domain Names and Company Name Retrieval
6.21-zzzz RFC 2443 A Distributed MARS Service Using SCSP (MARS-SCSP) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. 6.23 RFC 2443 A Distributed MARS Service Using SCSP
6.22 RFC 2471 IPv6 Testing Address Allocation This document gives default values for use on IPv4 networks, but is
designed to be extensible so it will work with IPv6 with appropriate
IANA definitions.
6.24 RFC 2471 IPv6 Testing Address Allocation
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
6.23 RFC 2481 A Proposal to add Explicit Congestion Notification 6.25 RFC 2520 NHRP with Mobile NHCs
(ECN) to IP (ECN-IP)
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
6.24-zzzz RFC 2520 NHRP with Mobile NHCs 6.26 RFC 2521 ICMP Security Failures Messages
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
6.25 RFC 2521 ICMP Security Failures Messages (ICMP-SEC) 6.27 RFC 2540 Detached Domain Name System (DNS) Information
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 6.28 RFC 2823 PPP over Simple Data Link (SDL) using SONET/SDH with
ATM-like framing
6.26 RFC 2540 Detached Domain Name System (DNS) Information There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.
(DNS-INFO)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 6.29 RFC 3123 A DNS RR Type for Lists of Address Prefixes
6.27 RFC 2770 GLOP Addressing in 233/8 This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
This document is specific to IPv4. 6.30 RFC 3168 The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to
IP
6.28 RFC 2823 PPP over Simple Data Link (SDL) using SONET/SDH with This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
ATM-like framing (PPP-SDL)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 6.31 RFC 3180 GLOP Addressing in 233/8
6.29 RFC 3123 A DNS RR Type for Lists of Address Prefixes (APL RR) This document is specific to IPv4 multicast addressing.
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. 7. Summary of the Results
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 In the initial survey of RFCs 52 positives were identified out of a
total of 185, broken down as follows:
7.0 Summary of Results Standards 17 of 24 or 70.83%
In the initial survey of RFCs 62 positives were identified out of a Draft Standards 6 of 20 or 30.00%
total of 159, broken down as follows:
Standards 16 of 18 or 88.89% Proposed Standards 22 of 110 or 20.00%
Draft Standards 6 of 16 or 37.50%
Proposed Standards 35 of 98 or 35.71% Experimental RFCs 7 of 31 or 22.58%
Experimental RFCs 5 of 27 or 18.52%
Of those identified many require no action because they document Of those identified many require no action because they document
outdated and unused protocols, while others are document protocols outdated and unused protocols, while others are document protocols
that are actively being updated by the appropriate working groups. that are actively being updated by the appropriate working groups.
Additionally there are many instances of standards that should be Additionally there are many instances of standards that should be
updated but do not cause any operational impact if they are not updated but do not cause any operational impact if they are not
updated. The remaining instances are documented below. updated.
7.1 Standards 7.1 Standards
7.1.01 STD3 Requirements for Internet Hosts (RFC 1122 ) 7.1.1 RFC 791 Internet Protocol
RFC 1122 is essentially a requirements document for IPv4 hosts and a
similar document for IPv6 hosts should be written.
7.1.02 STD 5 Internet Protocol (RFC 791, 922, 792, & 1122)
RFC 791 has been updated in the definition of IPv6 in RFC 2460. RFC 791 has been updated in the definition of IPv6 in RFC 2460.
RFC 922 has been included in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture, RFC 7.1.2 RFC 792 Internet Control Message Protocol
2373.
RFC 792 has been updated in the definition of ICMPv6 in RFC 2463. RFC 792 has been updated in the definition of ICMPv6 in RFC 2463.
RFC 1122 has been updated in the definition of Multicast Listener 7.1.3 RFC 891 DCN Networks
Discovery in RFC 2710.
7.1.03 STD 13 Domain Name System (RFCs 1034 & 1035)
New resource records for IPv6 addresses have been defined (AAAA & A6). DCN has long since been ceased to be used, so this specification is
no longer relevant.
7.1.04 STD 41 IP over Ethernet (RFC 894) 7.1.4 RFC 894 IP over Ethernet
This problem has been fixed by RFC2464, A Method for the Transmission This problem has been fixed by RFC2464, A Method for the Transmission
of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks. of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 7.1.5 RFC 895 IP over experimental Ethernets
7.1.05 STD 42 IP over Experimental Ethernets (RFC 895)
See above section.
7.1.06 STD 43 IP over IEEE 8.02 (RFC 1042)
The functionality of this RFC is included in subsequent standards
defining IPv6 over XXX.
7.1.07 STD 44 DCN Networks (RFC 891)
This protocol is no longer used and an updated protocol should not be
created.
7.1.08 STD 45 IP over HyperChannel (RFC 1044)
No updated document exists for this protocol. It is unclear whether
one is needed. An updated protocol MAY be created.
7.1.09 STD 46 IP over Arcnet (RFC 1201)
This problem has been fixed by RFC 2497, A Method for the
Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet Networks.
7.1.10 STD 48 IP over Netbios (RFC 1088)
A new protocol specification for tunneling IPv6 packets through
Netbios networks should be defined.
7.1.11 STD 52 IP over SMDS (RFC 1209)
An updated protocol for the transmission of IPv6 packets over SMDS
must be written.
7.2 Draft Standards
7.2.1 Boot Protocol (RFC 951)
This problem has been fixed in the DHCPv6 and Auto Configuration It is believed that experimental Ethernet networks are not being used
protocols of IPv6: RFC 2462: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration, anymore, so the specification is no longer relevant.
and Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) currently an
Internet Draft.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 7.1.6 RFC 922 Broadcasting Internet Datagrams in the Presence of Subnets
7.2.2 Path MTU Discovery (RFC 1191) Broadcasting is not used in IPv6, but similar functionality has been
included in RFC 3513, IPv6 Addressing Architecture.
This problem has been fixed in RFC 1981, Path MTU Discovery for IP 7.1.7 RFC 950 Internet Standard Subnetting Procedure
version 6.
7.2.3 The PPP Multilink Protocol (RFC 1990) Broadcasting is not used in IPv6, but similar functionality has been
included in RFC 3513, IPv6 Addressing Architecture.
A new class identifier for IPv6 packets must be registered with 7.1.8 RFC 1034 Domain Names: Concepts and Facilities
the IANA. It is RECOMMENDED that the (currently unassigned) value of
6 be assigned by the IANA with a description of "Internet Protocol
(IPv6) Address." An application for this assignment has been sent to
the IANA.
7.2.4 IP over HIPPI (RFC 2067) The problems have been fixed by defining new resource records for
IPv6 addresses.
An updated protocol for the transmission of IPv6 packets over HIPPI MAY 7.1.9 RFC 1035 Domain Names: Implementation and Specification
be written.
7.2.5 DHCP (RFC 2131) The problems have been fixed by defining new resource records for
IPv6 addresses.
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very 7.1.10 RFC 1042 IP over IEEE 802
advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.2.6 DHCP Options (RFC 2132) This problem has been fixed by RFC2470, Transmission of IPv6 Packets
over Token Ring Networks.
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very 7.1.11 RFC 1044 IP over HyperChannel
advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3 Proposed Standards No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
whether one is needed.
7.3.01 Tunneling IPX over IP (RFC 1234) 7.1.12 RFC 1088 IP over NetBIOS
This problem remains unresolved and a new protocol specification No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
must be created. whether one is needed.
7.3.02 ICMP Router Discovery (RFC 1256) 7.1.13 RFC 1112 Host Extensions for IP Multicast
This problem has been resolved in RFC 2461, Neighbor Discovery for The IPv4-specific parts of RFC 1112 have been updated in RFC 2710,
IP Version 6 (IPv6) Multicast Listener Discovery for IPv6.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.3.03 Encoding Net Addresses to Support Operation Over Non OSI Lower 7.1.14 RFC 1122 Requirements for Internet Hosts
Layers (RFC 1277)
This problem is unresolved, but it MAY be resolved with the creation RFC 1122 is essentially a requirements document for IPv4 hosts.
of a new encoding scheme definition. Similar work is in progress
(draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-xx.txt).
7.3.04 PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (RFC 1332) 7.1.15 RFC 1201 IP over ARCNET
This problem has been resolved in RFC 2472, IP Version 6 over PPP. This problem has been fixed by RFC 2497, A Method for the
Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet Networks.
7.3.05 IP Multicast over Token Ring (RFC 1469) 7.1.16 RFC 1209 IP over SMDS
The functionality of this specification has been essentially covered No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
in RFC 2470, IPv6 over Token Ring in section 8. whether one is needed.
7.3.06 IP Mobility Support (RFC 2002) 7.1.17 RFC 1390 Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Networks
The problems are being resolved by the Mobile IP WG and there is This problem has been fixed by RFC 2467, "Transmission of IPv6
a mature ID (draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-15.txt) Packets over FDDI Networks".
7.3.07 IP Encapsulation within IP (RFC 2003) 7.2 Draft Standards
This functionality for Mobile IPv6 is accomplished using the Routing 7.2.1 RFC 951 Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP)
Header as defined in RFC 2460, Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6)
Specification.
7.3.08 Minimal Encapsulation within IP (RFC 2004) This problem has been fixed by RFC 2462, IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration, and RFC3315, Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
for IPv6 (DHCPv6).
See Section 7.3.27 7.2.2 RFC 1191 Path MTU Discovery
7.3.09 Applicability Statement for IP Mobility Support (2005) This problem has been fixed in RFC 1981, Path MTU Discovery for IP
version 6.
See Section 7.3.26 7.2.3 RFC 1356 Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN
7.3.10 IP Router Alert Option (RFC 2113) This problem can be fixed by defining a new NLPID for IPv6. Note that
an NLPID has already been defined in RFC 2427, Multiprotocol
Interconnect over Frame Relay.
The problems identified are resolved in RFC 2711, IPv6 Router 7.2.4 RFC 1990 The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP)
Alert Option.
7.3.11 SLP (RFC 2165) A new class identifier ("6") for IPv6 packets has been registered
with the IANA by the original author, fixing this problem.
The problems have been addressed in RFC 3111, Service Location 7.2.5 RFC 2067 IP over HIPPI
Protocol Modifications for IPv6.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
whether one is needed.
7.3.12 Classical IP & ARP over ATM (RFC 2225) 7.2.6 RFC 2131 DHCP
The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM This problem has been fixed in RFC 3315, Dynamic Host Configuration
Networks. Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6).
7.3.13 IP Broadcast over ATM (RFC 2226) Further, the consensus of the DHC WG has been that the options
defined for DHCPv4 will not be automatically "carried forward" to
DHCPv6. Therefore, any further analysis of additionally specified
DHCPv4 Options has been omitted from this memo.
The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM 7.3 Proposed Standards
Networks.
7.3.14 IGMPv2 (RFC 2236) 7.3.1 RFC 1234 Tunneling IPX over IP
The problems have been resolved in RFC 2710, Multicast Listener No updated document exists for this specification. In practice, the
Discovery (MLD) for IPv6. similar effect can be achieved by the use of a layer 2 tunneling
protocol. It is unclear whether an updated document is needed.
7.3.15 DHCP Options for NDS (RFC 2241) 7.3.2 RFC 1256 ICMP Router Discovery
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very This problem has been resolved in RFC 2461, Neighbor Discovery for IP
advanced IDs address all the issues. Version 6 (IPv6).
7.3.16 Netware/IP Domain Name and Information (RFC 2242) 7.3.3 RFC 1277 Encoding Net Addresses to Support Operation Over Non OSI
Lower Layers
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very No updated document exists for this specification; the problem might
advanced IDs address all the issues. be resolved by the creation of a new encoding scheme if necessary. It
is unclear whether an update is needed.
7.3.17 Mobile IPv4 Comfit Options for PPP IPCP (RFC 2290) 7.3.4 RFC 1332 PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP)
The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new This problem has been resolved in RFC 2472, IP Version 6 over PPP.
protocol.
7.3.18 Transaction IP v3 (RFC 2371) 7.3.5 RFC 1469 IP Multicast over Token Ring
The problems identified are not addressed and a new standard MAY The functionality of this specification has been essentially covered
be defined. in RFC 2470, Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring Networks.
7.3.19 DHCP Option for Open Group User Authentication Protocol 7.3.6 RFC 2003 IP Encapsulation within IP
(RFC 2485)
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very This problem has been fixed by defining different IP-in-IP
advanced IDs address all the issues. encapsulation, for example, RFC 2473, Generic Packet Tunneling in
IPv6 Specification.
7.3.20 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Autoconfiguration 7.3.7 RFC 2004 Minimal Encapsulation within IP
(RFC 2563)
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
advanced IDs address all the issues. whether one is needed.
7.3.21 Non-Terminal DNS Redirection (RFC 2672) 7.3.8 RFC 2022 Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM Networks
The problems have not been addressed and a new specification MAY No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
be defined. whether one is needed.
7.3.22 Binary Labels in DNS (RFC 2673) 7.3.9 RFC 2113 IP Router Alert Option
The problems have not been addressed and a new specification MAY This problem has been fixed in RFC 2711, IPv6 Router Alert Option.
be defined.
7.3.23 IP over Vertical Blanking Interval of a TV Signal (RFC 2728) 7.3.10 RFC 2165 SLP
The problems have not been addressed and a new specification MAY The problems have been addressed in RFC 3111, Service Location
be defined. Protocol Modifications for IPv6.
7.3.24 IPv4 over IEEE 1394 (RFC 2734) 7.3.11 RFC 2225 Classical IP & ARP over ATM
This problem is being addressed by the IPv6 WG and an ID exists The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM Networks.
(draft-ietf-ipngwg-ipngwg-1394-02.txt).
7.3.25 Mobile IP Network Access Identity Extensions for IPv4 7.3.12 RFC 2226 IP Broadcast over ATM
(RFC 2794)
The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM Networks.
protocol.
7.3.26 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 800 (RFC 2834) 7.3.13 RFC 2371 Transaction IPv3
The problems are not being addressed and MAY be addressed in a new No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
protocol. whether one is needed.
7.3.27 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 6400 (RFC 2835) 7.3.14 RFC 2625 IP and ARP over Fibre Channel
The problems are not being addressed and MAY be addressed in a new There is work in progress to fix these problems
protocol. (draft-desanti-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-02.txt).
7.3.28 DHCP for IEEE 1394 (RFC 2855) 7.3.15 RFC 2672 Non-Terminal DNS Redirection
This problem is being dually addressed by the IPv6 and DHC WGs and IDs No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
exists that address this issue. whether one is needed.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 7.3.16 RFC 2673 Binary Labels in DNS
7.3.29 DHCP Name Server Search Option (RFC 2937) No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
whether one is needed.
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very 7.3.17 IP over Vertical Blanking Interval of a TV Signal (RFC 2728)
advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.30 DHCP User Class Option (RFC 3004) No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
whether one is needed.
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very 7.3.18 RFC 2734 IPv4 over IEEE 1394
advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.31 IPv4 Subnet Selection DHCP Option (RFC 3011) This problem has been fixed by RFC 3146, Transmission of IPv6 Packets
Over IEEE 1394 Networks.
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very 7.3.19 RFC 2834 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 800
advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.32 Using 31-Bit Prefixes for IPv4 P2P Links (RFC 3021) No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
whether one is needed.
No action is needed. 7.3.20 RFC 2835 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 6400
7.3.33 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP (RFC 3024) No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
whether one is needed.
The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new 7.3.21 RFC 3344 Mobility Support for IPv4
protocol.
7.3.34 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option (RFC 3046) The problems have been resolved by two upcoming RFCs, already waiting
publication (draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-24.txt and
draft-ietf-mobileip-mipv6-ha-ipsec-06.txt).
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very Since the first Mobile IPv4 specification in RFC 2002, a number of
advanced IDs address all the issues. extensions to it have been specified. As all of these depend on on
MIPv4, they have been omitted from further analysis in this memo.
7.3.35 Mobile IP Vender/Organization Specific Extensions (RFC 3115) 7.3.22 RFC 3376 Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3
The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new This problem is being fixed by MLDv2 specification
protocol. (draft-vida-mld-v2-xx.txt).
7.4 Experimental RFCs 7.4 Experimental RFCs
7.4.1 Traceroute using an IP Option (RFC 1393) 7.4.1 RFC 1393 Traceroute using an IP Option
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be This specification relies on the use of an IPv4 option. No
produced. replacement document exists, and it is unclear whether one is needed.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 7.4.2 RFC 1307 Dynamically Switched Link Control Protocol
7.4.2 NBMA ARP (RFC 1735) No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
whether one is needed.
7.4.3 RFC 1735 NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP)
This functionality has been defined in RFC 2491, IPv6 over This functionality has been defined in RFC 2491, IPv6 over
Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) networks and RFC 2332, NBMA Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) networks and RFC 2332, NBMA Next
Next Hop Resolution Protocol. Hop Resolution Protocol (NHRP).
7.4.3 ST2+ Protocol (RFC 1819) 7.4.4 RFC 1788 ICMP Domain Name Messages
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be No updated document exists for this specification. However, DNS
produced. Dynamic Updates should provide similar functionality, so an update
does not seem necessary.
7.4.4 ARP Extensions (RFC 1868) 7.4.5 RFC 1868 ARP Extension - UNARP
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be This mechanism defined a mechanism to purge ARP caches on a link.
produced. That functionality already exists in RFC 2461, Neighbor Discovery for
IPv6.
7.4.5 IP Over SCSI (RFC 2143) 7.4.6 RFC 2143 IP Over SCSI
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be No updated document exists for this specification. It is unclear
produced. whether one is needed.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 7.4.7 RFC 3180 GLOP Addressing in 233/8
8.0 Security Considerations Similar functionality is provided by RFC 3306, Unicast-Prefix-based
IPv6 Multicast Addresses, and no action is necessary.
8. Security Considerations
This memo examines the IPv6-readiness of specifications; this does This memo examines the IPv6-readiness of specifications; this does
not have security considerations in itself. not have security considerations in itself.
9.0 References 9. Acknowledgements
9.1 Normative
[1] [Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards] The author would like to acknowledge the support of the Internet
Philip J. Nesser II, Andreas Bergstrom. "Introduction to the Society in the research and production of this document. Additionally
Survey ", draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-01.txt the author would like to thanks his partner in all ways, Wendy M.
IETF work in progress, June 2003 Nesser.
[2] [Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards] The editor, Cleveland Mickles, would like to thank Steve Bellovin and
Philip J. Nesser II, Andreas Bergstrom: " IETF Sub-IP Area Russ Housley for their comments and Pekka Savola for his comments and
Standards ", draft-ietf-v6ops- ipv4survey-subip-01.txt, guidance during the editing of this document. Additionally he would
IETF work in progress. June 2003, like to thank his wife, Lesia, for her patient support.
10.0 Acknowledgements Pekka Savola helped in editing the latest versions of the document.
The author would like to acknowledge the support of the Internet Normative References
Society in the research and production of this document.
Additionally the author would like to thanks his partner in all
ways, Wendy M. Nesser.
The editor, Cleveland Mickles, would like to thank Steve Bellovin [1] II, P. and A. Bergstrom, "Introduction to the Survey of IPv4
and Russ Housley for their comments and Pekka Savola for his comments Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards",
and guidance during the editing of this document. Additionally the draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-04 (work in progress), October
editor would like to thank, his wife, Lesia R. Mickles for her patient 2003.
support.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 Authors' Addresses
11.0 Author's Addresses Cleveland Mickles
Please contact the authors with any questions, comments or suggestions Reston, VA 20191
at: USA
Cleveland Mickles (Primary Editor) EMail: cmickles.ee88@gtalumni.org
America Online, Inc (owned by AOL Time Warner)
12100 Sunrise Valley Drive. Phone: +1 703-265-5618
Reston, VA 20191, USA Email: micklesc@aol.net
Philip J. Nesser II (Author) Philip J. Nesser II
Principal
Nesser & Nesser Consulting Nesser & Nesser Consulting
13501 100th Ave NE, #5202 Phone: +1 425 481 4303 13501 100th Ave NE, #5202
Kirkland, WA 98034 Email: phil@nesser.com Kirkland, WA 98034
Fax: +1 425 48 USA
12.0 Intellectual Property Statement EMail: phil@nesser.com
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director. Director.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003 Full Copyright Statement
13.0 Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved. Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of develop- Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
ing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
required to translate it into languages other than English. The lim- followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
ited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked English.
by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document
and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DIS- revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.
CLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
 End of changes. 

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