INTERNET-DRAFT R. Hinden, Ipsilon Networks
November 21, 1997
TLA and NLA Assignment Rules
<draft-ietf-ipngwg-tla-assignment-02.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet Draft. 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. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by
other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet
Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as a
``working draft'' or ``work in progress.''
Please check the 1id-abstracts.txt listing contained in the internet-
drafts Shadow Directories on nic.ddn.mil, nnsc.nsf.net,
nic.nordu.net, ftp.nisc.sri.com, or munnari.oz.au to learn the
current status of any Internet Draft.
This internet draft expires on May 21, 1998.
1.0 Introduction
This document defines assignment rules for Top-Level Aggregation
Identifiers (TLA ID) and Next-Level Aggregation Identifiers (NLA ID)
as defined in [AGGR]. These rules apply to registries allocating TLA
ID's and to organizations receiving TLA ID's.
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].
draft-ietf-ipngwg-tla-assignment-02.txt [Page 1]
INTERNET-DRAFT TLA and NLA Assignment Rules November 1997
2.0 IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast Address Format
This document defines assignment rules for the TLA ID and NLA ID
fields in the IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast Address Format. This
address format is designed to support both the current provider-based
aggregation and a new type of exchange-based aggregation. The
combination will allow efficient routing aggregation for sites that
connect directly to providers and for sites that connect to
exchanges. Sites will have the choice to connect to either type of
aggregation entity.
While this address format is designed to support exchange-based
aggregation (in addition to current provider-based aggregation) it is
not dependent on exchanges for it's overall route aggregation
properties. It will provide efficient route aggregation with only
provider-based aggregation.
The aggregatable global unicast address format as defined in [AGGR]
is as follows:
| 3 | 13 | 32 | 16 | 64 bits |
+---+-----+-----------+--------+--------------------------------+
|FP | TLA | NLA ID | SLA ID | Interface ID |
| | ID | | | |
+---+-----+-----------+--------+--------------------------------+
<--Public Topology---> Site
<-------->
Topology
<------Interface Identifier----->
Where
FP Format Prefix (001)
TLA ID Top-Level Aggregation Identifier
NLA ID Next-Level Aggregation Identifier
SLA ID Site-Level Aggregation Identifier
INTERFACE ID Interface Identifier
3.0 Rules for Assignment of Top-Level Aggregation ID's
TLA ID's are assigned to organizations providing public transit
topology. They are specifically not assigned to organizations only
providing leaf or private transit topology. TLA ID assignment does
not imply ownership. It does imply stewardship over valuable
Internet resource.
draft-ietf-ipngwg-tla-assignment-02.txt [Page 2]
INTERNET-DRAFT TLA and NLA Assignment Rules November 1997
The IAB and IESG have authorized the Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority (IANA) as the appropriate entity to have the responsibility
for the management of the IPv6 address space as defined in [ALLOC].
The IANA will assign small blocks of TLA ID's to IPv6 registries.
The registries will assign the TLA ID's to organizations meeting the
requirements for TLA ID assignment. When the registries have
assigned all of their TLA ID's they can request that the IANA give
them another block. The blocks do not have to be contiguous. The
IANA may also assign TLA ID's to organizations directly. This
includes the temporary TLA assignment for testing and experimental
usage for activities such as the 6bone.
Registries are required to insure that organizations assigned TLA
ID's meet the following requirements:
1) Must have a plan to offer public native IPv6 service within 6
months from assignment. The plan must include NLA ID allocation
and registration procedures.
Native IPv6 service is defined as providing IPv6 service as
defined in the appropriate IPv6 over <LINK> specification for the
link at the boundary of the organization. This should include
running Neighbor Discovery (as appropriate) and exchanging IPv6
routing information. The method the organization uses to carry
IPv6 traffic across it's network is independent of this definition
and is a local issue for the organization.
2) Must have a verifiable track record of providing public Internet
transit service on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms,
to other providers. TLA ID's must not be assigned to
organizations that are only providing leaf service even if
multihomed.
Verification of an organizations track record in providing public
Internet transit service must include an independent third party
public listing. Examples include listing as a major national
service provider by publications such as Boardwatch Magazine,
listed as an established telecommunications provider in the
Fortune Magazine "Fortune 500" or "International 100" list,
Internet Magazine's "Internet Service Provider Guide", etc.
3) Payment of a one time registration fee of $5,000.00 (in US
Dollars) to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). This
payment must be made prior to the actual TLA assignment. Funds
collected will be used to support the operations of the IANA and
IPv6 registries.
draft-ietf-ipngwg-tla-assignment-02.txt [Page 3]
INTERNET-DRAFT TLA and NLA Assignment Rules November 1997
4) Must provide registry services on fair, reasonable, and non-
discriminatory terms, for the NLA ID address space it is
responsible for under its TLA ID. This must include both sites
and next level providers.
5) Must provide transit routing and forwarding to all assigned TLA
ID's on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms.
Organizations are not allowed to filter out any specific TLA ID's
(except temporarily for diagnostic purposes or emergency repair
purposed).
6) Periodically (interval set by registry) provide to registry
utilization statistics of the TLA ID it has custody of. The
organization must also show evidence of carrying TLA routing and
transit traffic. This can be in the form of traffic statistics,
traceroutes, routing table dumps, or similar means.
The IANA will hold an annual auction for fifty (50) TLA ID's for
organizations that plan to provide public Internet transit service on
fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms but do not have a
verifiable track record as defined in 2). All other requirements
must be meet including prepayment of the registration fee (refundable
if a TLA ID is not obtained at the auction). All fees collected
during the auction will be used to support the operations of the IANA
and IPv6 registries. The IANA will determine the procedures and
manner that the auction is held including setting a minimum bid.
Organizations which are given custody of a TLA ID and fail to
continue to meet all the above requirements may have the TLA ID
custody revoked.
4.0 Rules Assignment of Next-Level Aggregation ID's
Next-Level Aggregation ID's are used by organizations assigned a TLA
ID to create an addressing hierarchy and to identify sites. The
organization can assign the top part of the NLA ID in a manner to
create an addressing hierarchy appropriate to its network.
Organizations assigned TLA ID's are required to assume registry
duties for the NLA ID's they assign. Each organization assigned a
NLA ID is required to assume registry duties for the next level NLA
ID's it assigns.
The design of the bit layout of the NLA ID space for a specific TLA
ID is left to the organization responsible for that TLA ID. Likewise
the design of the bit layout of the next level NLA ID is the
responsibility of the organization assigned the previous level NLA
draft-ietf-ipngwg-tla-assignment-02.txt [Page 4]
INTERNET-DRAFT TLA and NLA Assignment Rules November 1997
ID. It is recommended that organizations assigning NLA address space
use "slow start" allocation procedures as is currently done with IPv4
CIDR blocks [CIDR].
The design of an NLA ID allocation plan is a tradeoff between routing
aggregation efficiency and flexibility. Creating hierarchies allows
for greater amount of aggregation and results in smaller routing
tables. Flat NLA ID assignment provides for easier allocation and
attachment flexibility, but results in larger routing tables.
5.0 Acknowledgments
The authors would like to express our thanks to Thomas Narten, Bob
Fink, Matt Crawford, Allison Mankin, Jim Bound, Christian Huitema,
Scott Bradner, Brian Carpenter, John Stewart, Eric Hoffman, and Jon
Postel for their review and constructive comments.
6.0 Security Considerations
IPv6 addressing documents do not have any direct impact on Internet
infrastructure security. Authentication of IPv6 packets is defined
in [AUTH].
draft-ietf-ipngwg-tla-assignment-02.txt [Page 5]
INTERNET-DRAFT TLA and NLA Assignment Rules November 1997
7.0 References
[AGGR] Hinden, R., Deering, S., O'Dell, M., "An Aggregatable
Global Unicast Address Format", Internet Draft, <draft-
ietf-ipngwg-unicast-aggr-02.txt>, July 1997.
[ALLOC] IAB and IESG, "IPv6 Address Allocation Management",
RFC1881, December 1995.
[ARCH] Hinden, R., "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture",
Internet Draft, <draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v2-04.txt>,
November 1997.
[AUTH] Atkinson, R., "IP Authentication Header", RFC1826, August
1995.
[CIDR] Fuller, V., T. Li, K. Varadhan, J. Yu, "Supernetting: an
Address Assignment and Aggregation Strategy", RFC1338.
[IPV6] Deering, S., Hinden, R., Editors, "Internet Protocol,
Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC1883, December 1995.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC2119, BCP14, March 1997.
8.0 Authors' Addresses
Robert M. Hinden phone: 1 408 990-2004
Ipsilon Networks, Inc. email: hinden@ipsilon.com
232 Java Drive
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
USA
draft-ietf-ipngwg-tla-assignment-02.txt [Page 6]
