DHCPv6 Options for Home Network Authoritative Naming Service
draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-07
Homenet D. Migault
Internet-Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Standards Track R. Weber
Expires: October 21, 2020 Akamai
T. Mrugalski
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
C. Griffiths
W. Cloetens
April 19, 2020
DHCPv6 Options for Home Network Authoritative Naming Service
draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-07
Abstract
This document defines DHCPv6 options so any agnostic Homnet Naming
Authority (HNA) can automatically proceed to the appropriate
configuration and outsource the authoritative naming service for the
home network. In most cases, the outsourcing mechanism is
transparent for the end user.
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 https://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 October 21, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
Migault, et al. Expires October 21, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-DrafDHCPv6 Options for Authoritative Naming Service April 2020
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Protocol Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Payload Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Client Public Key Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Distribution Master Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3. Reverse Synchronization Server Option . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. DHCP Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. DHCPv6 Server Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.3. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.1. DNSSEC is recommended to authenticate DNS hosted data . . 8
7.2. Channel between the HNA and ISP DHCP Server MUST be
secured . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.3. HNAs are sensitive to DoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. Scenarios and impact on the End User . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. Base Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10.1. Third Party Registered Homenet Domain . . . . . . . . . 9
10.2. Third Party DNS Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10.3. Multiple ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
The reader is expected to be familiar with
Show full document text