[Search] [pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 rfc3793                           Informational
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-subip-04.txt     Nesser & Nesser Consulting
Internet Draft                                  Andreas Bergstrom (Ed.)
                                             Ostfold University College
                                                          November 2003
                                                     Expires April 2004

           Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed
                      IETF Sub-IP Area Standards

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

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at


This document seeks to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in currently
deployed IETF Sub-IP Area documented standards.  In order to
successfully transition from an all IPv4 Internet to an all IPv6
Internet, many interim steps will be taken. One of these steps is the
evolution of current protocols that have IPv4 dependencies.  It is
hoped that these protocols (and their implementations) will be
redesigned to be network address independent, but failing that will at
least dually support IPv4 and IPv6.  To this end, all Standards (Full,
Draft, and Proposed) as well as Experimental RFCs will be surveyed and
any dependencies will be documented.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Document Organisation
3. Full Standards
4. Draft Standards
5. Proposed Standards
6. Experimental RFCs
7. Summary of Results
   7.1 Standards
   7.2 Draft Standards
   7.3 Proposed Standards
   7.4 Experimental RFCs
8. Security Consideration
9. Acknowledgements
10. References
11. Authors' Addresses
12. Intellectual Property Statement
13. Full Copyright Statement

1.0 Introduction

This document is part of a document set aiming to document all usage of
IPv4 addresses in IETF standards. In an effort to have the information
in a manageable form, it has been broken into 7 documents conforming
to the current IETF areas (Application,  Internet, Management &
Operations, Routing, Security, Sub-IP and Transport).

For a full introduction, please see the introduction [1].

2.0 Document Organization

The rest of the document sections are described below.

Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 each describe the raw analysis of Full, Draft,
and Proposed Standards, and Experimental RFCs.  Each RFC is discussed
in its turn starting with RFC 1 and ending with (around) RFC 3100.
The comments for each RFC are "raw" in nature.  That is, each RFC is
discussed in a vacuum and problems or issues discussed do not "look
ahead" to see if the problems have already been fixed.

Section 7 is an analysis of the data presented in Sections 3, 4, 5, and
6.  It is here that all of the results are considered as a whole and the
problems that have been resolved in later RFCs are correlated.

3.0 Full Standards

Full Internet Standards (most commonly simply referred to as
"Standards") are fully mature protocol specification that are widely
implemented and used throughout the Internet.

There are no full standars within the scope of this document.

4.0 Draft Standards

Draft Standards represent the penultimate standard level in the IETF.
A protocol can only achieve draft standard when there are multiple,
independent, interoperable implementations.  Draft Standards are usually
quite mature and widely used.

There are no draft standards within the scope of this document.

5.0 Proposed Standards

Proposed Standards are introductory level documents.  There are no
requirements for even a single implementation.  In many cases Proposed
are never implemented or advanced in the IETF standards process.  They
therefore are often just proposed ideas that are presented to the
Internet community.  Sometimes flaws are exposed or they are one of
many competing solutions to problems.  In these later cases, no
discussion is presented as it would not serve the purpose of this

5.01 RFC 3031 Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture (MPLS)

There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.

5.02 RFC 3032 MPLS Label Stack Encoding

This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.

5.03 RFC 3034 Use of Label Switching on Frame Relay Networks

There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.

5.04 RFC 3035 MPLS using LDP and ATM VC Switching

There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.

5.05 RFC 3036 LDP Specification

This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.

5.06 RFC 3038 VCID Notification over ATM link for LDP

There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.

6.0 Experimental RFCs

Experimental RFCs typically define protocols that do not have widescale
implementation or usage on the Internet.  They are often propriety in
nature or used in limited arenas.  They are documented to the Internet
community in order to allow potential interoperability or some other
potential useful scenario.  In a few cases they are presented as
alternatives to the mainstream solution to an acknowledged problem.

6.1 RFC 3063 MPLS Loop Prevention Mechanism

There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.

7.0  Summary of Results

In the initial survey of RFCs 0 positives were identified out of a
total of 7, broken down as follows:

        Standards                                0 of  0 or  0.00%
        Draft Standards                          0 of  0 or  0.00%
        Proposed Standards                       0 of  6 or  0.00%
        Experimental RFCs                        0 of  1 or  0.00%

Of those identified many require no action because they document
outdated and unused protocols, while others are document protocols
that are actively being updated by the appropriate working groups.
Additionally there are many instances of standards that should be
updated but do not cause any operational impact if they are not
updated.  The remaining instances are documented below.

7.1  Standards

There are no standards within the scope of this document.

7.2 Draft Standards

There are no draft standards within the scope of this document.

7.3  Proposed Standards

There are no proposed standards with recommendations in this document.

7.4  Experimental RFCs

There are no experimental standards with recommendations in this

8.0 Security Consideration

This memo examines the IPv6-readiness of specifications; this does not
have security considerations in itself.

9.0 Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Internet
Society in the research and production of this document.
Additionally the author, Philip J. Nesser II, would like to thanks
his partner in all ways, Wendy M. Nesser.

The editor, Andreas Bergstrom, would like to thank Pekka Savola
for guidance and collection of comments for the editing of this

10.0 References

10.1 Normative

[1]  Philip J. Nesser II, Andreas Bergstrom. "Introduction to the
     Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards",
     draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-05.txt IETF work in progress,
     November 2003

11.0 Authors' Addresses

Please contact the author with any questions, comments or suggestions

Philip J. Nesser II
Nesser & Nesser Consulting
13501 100th Ave NE, #5202
Kirkland, WA 98034

Email:  phil@nesser.com
Phone:  +1 425 481 4303
Fax:    +1 425 48

Andreas Bergstrom (Editor)
Ostfold University College
Email: andreas.bergstrom@hiof.no
Address: Rute 503 Buer
         N-1766 Halden

12.0 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

13.0  Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  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 docu-
   ment 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 develop-
   ing 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 lim-
   ited 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