Issues with multiple stateful DHCPv6 options
draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-06
Network Working Group O. Troan
Internet-Draft B. Volz
Updates: 3315,3633 (if approved) Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track M. Siodelski
Expires: January 1, 2015 ISC
June 30, 2014
Issues with multiple stateful DHCPv6 options
draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-06.txt
Abstract
Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) was not written
with the expectation that additional stateful DHCPv6 options would be
developed. IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration
Protocol (DHCP) version 6 shoe-horned the new options for Prefix
Delegation into DHCPv6. Implementation experience of the CPE model
described in RFC 7084 has shown multiple issues with the DHCPv6
protocol in supporting multiple stateful options. This document
updates RFC 3315 and RFC 3633.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 1, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
Troan, et al. Expires January 1, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Multiple Stateful Option June 2014
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Handling of multiple IA options types . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Placement of Status Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Advertise Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.3. T1/T2 Timers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.4. Renew Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.4.1. Updates to RFC 3315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.4.2. Updates to RFC 3633 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.4.3. Creation and Transmission of Renew Messages (unified
text) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.4.4. Receipt of Renew Messages (unified text) . . . . . . 11
4.5. Rebind Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.5.1. Updates to RFC 3315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.5.2. Updates to RFC 3633 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.5.3. Creation and Transmission of Rebind Messages (unified
text) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.5.4. Receipt of Rebind Messages (unified text) . . . . . . 16
4.6. Confirm Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.7. Decline Should Not Necessarily Trigger a Release . . . . 18
4.8. Multiple Provisioning Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1. Introduction
DHCPv6 [RFC3315] was not written with the expectation that additional
stateful DHCPv6 options would be developed. DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation
[RFC3633] shoe-horned the new options for Prefix Delegation into
Show full document text