Dynamic Host Congiguration T. Chown
Internet-Draft University of Southampton
Expires: May 18, 2004 S. Venaas
UNINETT
A.K. Vijayabhaskar
Hewlett-Packard
November 18, 2003
Renumbering Requirements for Stateless DHCPv6
draft-chown-dhc-stateless-dhcpv6-renumbering-00
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
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://
www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 18, 2004.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
IPv6 hosts using Stateless Address Autoconfiguration are able to
automatically configure their IPv6 address and default router
settings. However, further settings are not available. If such
hosts wish to automatically configure their DNS, NTP or other
specific settings the stateless variant of the Dynamic Host
Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) could be used. This
combination of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration and stateless
DHCPv6 could be used quite commonly in IPv6 networks. However,
hosts using such a combination currently have no means by which to be
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Renumbering for Stateless DHCPv6 November 2003
informed of changes in stateless DHCPv6 option settings, e.g. the
addition of a new NTP server address, changes in DNS search paths, or
full site renumbering. This document is presented as a problem
statement from which a solution should be proposed in a subsequent
document.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Renumbering Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1 Site renumbering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2 Changes to a DHCPv6-assigned setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Renumbering Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Solution Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 7
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Renumbering for Stateless DHCPv6 November 2003
1. Introduction
IPv6 hosts using Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [1] are able to
automatically configure their IPv6 address and default router
settings. While Stateless Address Autoconfiguration for IPv6 allows
automatic configuration of these settings, it does not provide a
mechanism for additional, non IP-address settings to be automatically
configured.
The full version of the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6
(DHCPv6) [2] is designed to provide both stateful address assignment
to IPv6 hosts, as well as additional (non IP-address) configuration
including DNS, NTP and other specific settings. A full stateful
DHCPv6 server allocates the addresses and maintains the clients
bindings to keep track of client leases.
If hosts using Stateless Address Autoconfiguration for IPv6 wish to
automatically configure their DNS, NTP or other specific settings the
stateless variant [3] of DHCPv6 could be used. The stateless variant
of DHCPv6 is more lightweight. It does not do address assignment,
instead it only provides additional configuration parameters like DNS
resolver addresses. It does not maintain state about the information
assigned to clients; the additional parameters do not have an
explicit life-time associated with them in the same way that IP
addresses do, and hence the DHCPv6 server does not need to maintain
the state of the clients.
This combination of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration and stateless
DHCPv6 could be used quite commonly in IPv6 networks. In the
absence of an alternative method for DNS, NTP and other options to be
automatically configured, it may become the most common combination
for statelessly configuring hosts.
2. Problem Statement
A problem however lies in the ability, or lack of ability, of clients
using this combination to be informed of (or to deduce) changes in
DHCPv6 assigned settings.
While a DHCPv6 server unicasts Reconfigure message to individual
clients to trigger the clients to intiate Information-request/reply
configuration exchanges to update their configuration settings, the
stateless variant of DHCPv6 cannot use the Reconfigure mechanism
because it does not maintain a list of IP addresses (leases) to send
the unicast messages to.
Thus events including the following cannot be handled:
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Renumbering for Stateless DHCPv6 November 2003
o Full site renumbering
o DNS server change of address
o NTP server change of address
o Changes in DNS search paths
It would be highly desirable that a host using the combination of
Stateless Address Autoconfiguration and stateless DHCPv6 could handle
a renumbering or reconfiguration event, whether planned or unplanned
by the network administrator.
3. Renumbering Scenarios
There are two main scenarios for changes to DHCPv6-assigned settings,
that would require the client to initiate an Information-request/
reply exchange to update the configuration.
3.1 Site renumbering
One of the fundamental principles of IPv6 is that sites receive their
IPv6 address allocations from an ISP using provider assigned (PA)
address space. There is currently no provider independent (PI)
address space in IPv6. A site wishing to change ISP must thus
renumber its network. Any such site renumbering will require hosts
to reconfigure both their own address and default router settings as
well as their stateless DHCPv6-assigned settings.
3.2 Changes to a DHCPv6-assigned setting
An administrator may need to change one or more stateless
DHCPv6-assigned settings, e.g. an NTP server, DNS server, or the DNS
search path. This may be required if a new, additional DNS server
is brought online, is moved to a new network (prefix), or an existing
server is decommissioned or known to be unavailable.
4. Renumbering Requirements
Ideally, any of the above scenarios should be handled automatically
by the hosts on the network. For this to be realised, a method is
required for the hosts to be informed that they should request new
stateless DHCPv6-assigned setting information.
The solution to the problem may depend on whether the renumbering or
configuration change is a planned or unplanned one, from the
perspective of the network administrator. There is already work
underway in understanding the planned renumbering [4] scenario for
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Renumbering for Stateless DHCPv6 November 2003
IPv6 networks. However, there is currently no mechanism in
stateless DHCPv6 to even handle planned renumbering events.
The unplanned renumbering event, which may be more common in smaller,
unmanaged networks, is more difficult to cater for. Ideally, any
solution for the problem should consider planned and unplanned
events.
The solution should also be secure, such that additional security
concerns are not added to the stateless DHCPv6 networking
environment.
5. Solution Space
Solutions should be designed and presented in a separate document.
An initial, brief set of candidate solutions might include:
o Adding a Reconfigure message mechanism that would work in the
stateless DHCPv6 environment. This could enable planned or
unplanned events, but may require a multicast mechanism to be
realised.
o Conveying a valid lifetime timer to clients for stateless
DHCPv6-assigned settings. This could primarily enable planned
events, but with a small time-out it could to some extent handle
unplanned events at the expense of the additional request traffic.
o Using some form of Router Advertisement as a hint to request new
stateless DHCPv6-assigned settings. Using only an observed new
Router Advertisement prefix as a hint to re-request settings would
not handle changes that are purely to NTP, DNS or other options.
6. Summary
This document presents a problem statement for how IPv6 hosts that
use the combination of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration and
stateless DHCPv6 may be informed of renumbering events or other
changes to the settings that they originally learnt through stateless
DHCPv6. A short list of candidate solutions is presented, which the
authors hope may be expanded upon in subsequent documents.
7. Security Considerations
There are no security considerations in this problem statemement per
se. However, whatever mechanism is designed or chosen to address this
problem should avoid the introduction of new security concerns for
(stateless) DHCPv6.
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Renumbering for Stateless DHCPv6 November 2003
Normative References
[1] Thomson, S. and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462, December 1998.
[2] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C. and M.
Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)",
RFC 3315, July 2003.
[3] Droms, R., "A Guide to Implementing Stateless DHCPv6 Service",
draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-01 (work in progress), October
2003.
[4] Baker, F., "Procedures for Renumbering an IPv6 Network without a
Flag Day", draft-baker-ipv6-renumber-procedure-01 (work in
progress), October 2003.
Authors' Addresses
Tim Chown
University of Southampton
School of Electronics and Computer Science
Southampton, Hampshire SO17 1BJ
United Kingdom
EMail: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Stig Venaas
UNINETT
Trondheim NO 7465
Norway
EMail: venaas@uninett.no
Vijayabhaskar A K
Hewlett-Packard STSD-I
29, Cunningham Road
Bangalore 560052
India
EMail: vijayak@india.hp.com
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Renumbering for Stateless DHCPv6 November 2003
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director.
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Renumbering for Stateless DHCPv6 November 2003
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.
Chown, et al. Expires May 18, 2004 [Page 8]