Network Working Group R. Droms
Internet-Draft Cisco
Expires: December 22, 2003 June 23, 2003
DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO
draft-droms-nemo-dhcpv6-pd-00.txt
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 December 22, 2003.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
One aspect of network mobility support is the assignment of a prefix
or prefixes to a mobile router (MR) for use on the links in the
mobile network. DHCPv6 prefix delegation can be used for this
configuration task.
1. Introduction
One aspect of network mobility support is the assignment of a prefix
or prefixes to a mobile router for use on the links in the mobile
network. DHCPv6 prefix delegation [1] (DHCPv6PD) can be used for
this configuration task.
Droms Expires December 22, 2003 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO June 2003
2. Terminology
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 RFC2119 [2].
The following terms used in this document are defined in the IPv6
Addressing Architecture document [3]:
link-local unicast address
link-local scope multicast address
The following terms used in this document are defined in the mobile
IPv6 specification [4]:
home agent (HA)
home link
The following terms used in this document are defined in the mobile
network terminology document [5]:
mobile router (MR)
mobile network
The following terms used in this document are defined in the DHCPv6
[6] and DHCPv6 prefix delegation [1] specifications:
delegating router (DR)
requesting router (RR)
DHCPv6 relay agent
3. Application of DHCPv6 prefix delegation to mobile networks
The network mobility requirements document [7] defines a solution for
mobile IPv6 networks based on the mobile IPv6 protocol [4]. In this
solution, a MR uses the mobile IPv6 protocol to establish a maintain
a session with its HA, and uses bidirectional tunneling between the
MR and HA to provide a path through which hosts attached to links in
the mobile network can maintain connectivity with nodes not in the
mobile network.
The requirements for basic network mobility support [8] include the
Droms Expires December 22, 2003 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO June 2003
ability of the MR to receive delegated prefixes that can then be
assigned to links in the mobile network. DHCPv6PD can be used to
meet this requirement for prefix delegation.
To use DHCPv6PD for mobile networks, the HA assumes the role of the
DR and the MR assumes the role of the RR. Throughout the remainder
of this document, the HA will be assumed to be acting as a DHCPv6PD
DR and the MR will be assumed to be acting as a RR.
The HA and MR exchange DHCPv6PD protocol messages through the tunnel
connecting them. The tunnel acts as the link labeled "DSL to
subscriber premises" in figure 1 of the DHCPv6PD specification.
The HA (acting as the DR) is provisioned with prefixes to be assigned
using any of the prefix assignment mechanisms described in the
DHCPv6PD specifications. Other updates to the HA data structures
required as a side effect of prefix delegation are specified by the
particular network mobility protocol. For example, in the case of
"Basic Network Mobility Support" [8], the HA would add an entry in
its binding cache registering the delegated prefix to the MR to which
the prefix was delegated.
3.1 Use of HA-MR tunnel for DHCPv6 messages
The DHCPv6 specification requires the use of link-local unicast and
link-local scope multicast addresses in DHCPv6 messages (except in
certain cases as defined in section 22.12 of the DHCPv6
specification). Section 10.4.2 of the mobile IPv6 specification
describes forwarding of intercepted packets, and the third paragraph
of that section begins:
However, packets addressed to the mobile node's link-local address
MUST NOT be tunneled to the mobile node.
The DHCPv6 messages exchanged between the HA and the MR originate
only with the HA and the MR, and therefore are not "intercepted
packets" and are may be forwarded between the HA and the MR through
the tunnel.
3.2 Exchanging DHCPv6 messages when HA and MR are on the same link
When the MR is on its home link, the HA uses the home link to
exchange DHCPv6PD messages with the MR, even if there is a tunnel
across the home link between the MR and the HA. It is the
responsibility of the implementation to determine when the MR is on
its home link and to avoid use of any existing tunnel.
Droms Expires December 22, 2003 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO June 2003
3.3 Location of DHCPv6PD Delegating Router function
The DHCPv6PD DR function MUST be implemented in the HA for the MR.
The use of a DHCPv6 relay agent is not defined for DHCPv6PD.
3.4 Use of DHCPv6 for other configuration information
The DHCPv6 messages exchanged between the MR and the HA may also be
used for other DHCPv6 functions in addition to DHCPv6PD. For
example, the HA may assign global addresses to the MR and may pass
other configuration information such as a list of available DNS
recursive resolvers to the MR using the same DHCPv6 messages as used
for DHCPV6PD.
4. Security Considerations
This document describes the use of DHCPv6 for prefix delegation in
mobile networks. It does not introduce any additional security
considerations beyond those described in the "Security
Considerations" section of the DHCPv6 base specification [6] and the
"Security Considerations" of the DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation
specification [1].
Following the DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation specification, HAs and MRs
SHOULD use DHCPv6 authentication as described in section
"Authentication of DHCP messages" of the DHCPv6 specification [6], to
guard against attacks mounted through prefix delegation.
5. IANA Considerations
This document describes the use of DHCPv6 for prefix delegation in
mobile networks. It does not introduce any additional IANA
considerations.
Normative References
[1] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for DHCPv6", draft-
ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-04 (work in progress),
June 2003.
[2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[3] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)
Addressing Architecture", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[4] Johnson, D., Perkins, C. and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in
IPv6", draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-23 (work in progress), May 2003.
Droms Expires December 22, 2003 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO June 2003
[5] Ernst, T., "Network Mobility Support Terminology", draft-ietf-
nemo-terminology-00 (work in progress), May 2003.
[6] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C. and M.
Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)",
draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-28 (work in progress), November 2002.
[7] Ernst, T., "Network Mobility Support Goals and Requirements",
draft-ietf-nemo-requirements-01 (work in progress), May 2003.
[8] Wakikawa, R., Mitsuya, K., Uehara, K. and T. Ernst, "Basic
Network Mobility Support", draft-wakikawa-nemo-basic-00 (work in
progress), February 2003.
Author's Address
Ralph Droms
Cisco
1414 Massachusetts Avenue
Boxborough, MA 01719
Japan
Phone: +1 978.936.1674
EMail: rdroms@cisco.com
Droms Expires December 22, 2003 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO June 2003
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 assigns.
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
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Droms Expires December 22, 2003 [Page 6]