DHCP Options for the Port Control Protocol (PCP)
draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (pcp WG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Mohamed Boucadair , Reinaldo Penno , Dan Wing | ||
| Last updated | 2014-04-01 (Latest revision 2013-11-04) | ||
| Replaces | draft-bpw-pcp-dhcp | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | plain text xml htmlized pdfized bibtex | ||
| Reviews |
GENART Last Call review
Ready with Issues
|
||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Dave Thaler | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2014-03-04 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Waiting for Writeup | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Ted Lemon | ||
| Send notices to | pcp-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp@tools.ietf.org | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | IANA - Not OK |
draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09
PCP Working Group M. Boucadair
Internet-Draft France Telecom
Intended status: Standards Track R. Penno
Expires: May 09, 2014 D. Wing
Cisco
November 05, 2013
DHCP Options for the Port Control Protocol (PCP)
draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09
Abstract
This document specifies DHCP (IPv4 and IPv6) options to configure
hosts with Port Control Protocol (PCP) Server IP addresses. The use
of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 depends on the PCP deployment scenario.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
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 May 09, 2014.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 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
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft PCP DHCP Options November 2013
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. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. DHCPv6 PCP Server Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. DHCPv4 PCP Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. DHCP Server Configuration Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Dual-Stack Hosts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Hosts with Multiple Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.1. DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.2. DHCPv4 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
This document defines DHCPv4 [RFC2131] and DHCPv6 [RFC3315] options
that can be used to provision PCP server [RFC6887] IP addresses.
This specification assumes a PCP server is reachable with one or
multiple IP addresses. As such, a list of IP addresses can be
returned in the PCP server DHCP option.
This specification allows returning one or multiple instances of the
PCP server DHCP option. This is used as a hint to guide the PCP
client when determining whether to send PCP requests to one or
multiple PCP servers. For guidelines on how a PCP client can use
multiple IP addresses and multiple PCP servers, see
[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection].
The use of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 depends on the PCP deployment scenarios.
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft PCP DHCP Options November 2013
2. Terminology
This document makes use of the following terms:
o PCP server denotes a functional element that receives and
processes PCP requests from a PCP client. A PCP server can be co-
located with or be separated from the function (e.g., NAT,
Firewall) it controls. Refer to [RFC6887].
o PCP client denotes a PCP software instance responsible for issuing
PCP requests to a PCP server. Refer to [RFC6887].
o DHCP refers to both DHCPv4 [RFC2131] and DHCPv6 [RFC3315].
o DHCP client (or client) denotes a node that initiates requests to
obtain configuration parameters from one or more DHCP servers.
o DHCP server (or server) refers to a node that responds to requests
from DHCP clients.
3. DHCPv6 PCP Server Option
3.1. Format
The PCP server DHCPv6 option can be used to configure a list of IPv6
addresses of a PCP server.
The format of this option is shown in Figure 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OPTION_PCP_SERVER | Option-length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
| ipv6-address |
| |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
| ipv6-address |
| |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: PCP Server DHCPv6 Option
The fields of the option shown in Figure 1 are as follows:
o Option-code: OPTION_PCP_SERVER (TBA, see Section 9.1)
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft PCP DHCP Options November 2013
o Option-length: Length of the 'PCP server IP Address(es)' field in
octets. MUST be a multiple of 16.
o PCP server IPv6 Addresses: Includes one or more IPv6 addresses
[RFC4291] of the PCP server to be used by the PCP client. Note,
IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses (Section 2.5.5.2 of [RFC4291]) are
allowed to be included in this option.
3.2. Client Behavior
To discover a PCP server, the DHCPv6 client requests PCP server IP
addresses by including OPTION _PCP_SERVER in an Option Request Option
(ORO), as described in Section 22.7 of [RFC3315].
The client MUST be prepared to receive multiple instances of the
DHCPv6 PCP server option; each instance is to be treated as a
separate PCP server.
If an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address is received in an OPTION_PCP_SERVER
option, it indicates that the PCP server has the corresponding IPv4
address.
When multiple instances of the PCP server DHCPv6 option or multiple
IPv6 addresses are received from the DHCPv6 server, the PCP client
follows the behavior specified in [I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection].
4. DHCPv4 PCP Option
4.1. Format
The PCP server DHCPv4 option can be used to configure a list of IPv4
addresses of a PCP server. The format of this option is illustrated
in Figure 2.
Code Len PCP server IPv4 Address PCP server IPv4 Address
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+--
| TBA | n | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a1 | a2 | ...
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+--
This format assumes that an IPv4 address is encoded as a1.a2.a3.a4.
Figure 2: PCP Server DHCPv4 Option
The description of the fields is as follows:
o Code: OPTION_PCP_SERVER (TBA, see Section 9.2);
o Length: Includes the length of included IP address(es) in octets;
MUST be a multiple of 4.
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft PCP DHCP Options November 2013
o PCP server IPv4 Addresses: Contains one or more IPv4 addresses of
the PCP server to be used by the PCP client.
4.2. Client Behavior
To discover a PCP server, the DHCPv4 client requests PCP server IP
addresses by including OPTION_PCP_SERVER in a Parameter Request List
Option [RFC2132].
The client MUST be prepared to receive multiple instances of the
DHCPv4 PCP server option; each instance is to be treated as a
separate PCP server.
5. DHCP Server Configuration Guidelines
DHCP servers supporting the DHCP PCP server option can be configured
with a list of IP addresses of the PCP server(s). If multiple IP
addresses are configured, the DHCP server MUST be explicitly
configured whether all or some of these addresses refer to:
1. the same PCP server: the DHCP server returns multiple addresses
in the same instance of the DHCP PCP server option.
2. distinct PCP servers: the DHCP server returns multiple instances
of the DHCP PCP server option to the requesting client; each
instance is referring to a distinct PCP server. For example,
multiple OPTION_PCP_SERVER instances may be configured to a PCP
client in some deployment contexts such as multi-homing. It is
out of scope of this document to enumerate all deployment
scenarios that require multiple OPTION_PCP_SERVER instances to be
returned.
The DHCP server MAY be configurable with one or multiple FQDNs of the
PCP server(s). In such case, the DHCP server MUST resolve these
FQDNs into one or a list of IP addresses. If multiple FQDNs are
configured to the DHCP server, the DHCP server MUST include multiple
OPTION_PCP_SERVER instances; each of them carries one or a list of IP
addresses that resulted from the FQDN resolution. DHCPv4 servers
supporting PCP server option MUST resolve any configured FQDNs into
IPv4 addresses while DHCPv6 servers may resolve any configured FQDNs
into IPv6 and/or IPv4 addresses. If an IPv4 address is retrieved by
the DHCPv6 server, the corresponding IPv4-mapped IPv6 address is
included in the OPTION_PCP_SERVER DHPCv6 option. If both IPv4 and
IPv6 addresses are retrieved by the DHCPv6 server, these addresses
are included in the same OPTION_PCP_SERVER DHPCv6 option (IPv4
addresses are represented as IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses).
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft PCP DHCP Options November 2013
Discussion: The motivation for this design is to accommodate
deployment cases where an IPv4 connectivity service is provided
while only DHPCv6 is in use (e.g., an IPv4-only PCP server in a
DS-Lite context [RFC6333]).
For guidelines on providing context-specific configuration
information (e.g., returning a regional-based configuration), and
information on how a server might be configured with FQDNs that get
resolved on demand, see [I-D.ietf-dhc-topo-conf].
6. Dual-Stack Hosts
A Dual-Stack host might receive OPTION_PCP_SERVER via both DHCPv4 and
DHCPv6. For guidance on how a client can handle PCP server IP lists
for the same network but obtained via different mechanisms, see
[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection].
7. Hosts with Multiple Interfaces
A host may have multiple network interfaces (e.g, 3G, IEEE 802.11,
etc.); each configured differently. Each PCP server learned MUST be
associated with the interface via which it was learned. Refer to
[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection] and Section 8.4 of [RFC6887] for more
discussion on multi-interface considerations.
8. Security Considerations
The security considerations in [RFC2131] and [RFC3315] are to be
considered. PCP-related security considerations are discussed in
[RFC6887].
9. IANA Considerations
9.1. DHCPv6 Option
IANA is requested to assign the following new DHCPv6 Option Code in
the registry maintained in http://www.iana.org/assignments/
dhcpv6-parameters:
Option Name Value
----------------- -----
OPTION_PCP_SERVER TBA
9.2. DHCPv4 Option
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft PCP DHCP Options November 2013
IANA is requested to assign the following new DHCPv4 Option Code in
the registry maintained in http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-
dhcp-parameters/:
Option Name Value
----------------- -----
OPTION_PCP_SERVER TBA
10. Acknowledgements
Many thanks to B. Volz, C. Jacquenet, R. Maglione, D. Thaler, T.
Mrugalski, T. Reddy, S. Cheshire and M. Wasserman for their review
and comments.
Special thanks to T. Lemon for the review and his continuous effort
to enhance this specification.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC
2131, March 1997.
[RFC2132] Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor
Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997.
[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
[RFC6887] Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P.
Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", RFC 6887, April
2013.
11.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-dhc-topo-conf]
Lemon, T. and T. Mrugalski, "Customizing DHCP
Configuration on the Basis of Network Topology", draft-
ietf-dhc-topo-conf-00 (work in progress), October 2013.
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft PCP DHCP Options November 2013
[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection]
Boucadair, M., Penno, R., Wing, D., Patil, P., and T.
Reddy, "PCP Server Selection", draft-ietf-pcp-server-
selection-01 (work in progress), May 2013.
[RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4
Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011.
Authors' Addresses
Mohamed Boucadair
France Telecom
Rennes 35000
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Reinaldo Penno
Cisco
USA
Email: repenno@cisco.com
Dan Wing
Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, California 95134
USA
Email: dwing@cisco.com
Boucadair, et al. Expires May 09, 2014 [Page 8]