RADIUS Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute
RFC 4818
| Document | Type | RFC - Proposed Standard (April 2007) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Joseph A. Salowey , Ralph Droms | ||
| Last updated | 2015-10-14 | ||
| Replaces | draft-salowey-radext-delegated-prefix | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | (None) | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | RFC 4818 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | David Kessens | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
RFC 4818
Network Working Group J. Salowey
Request for Comments: 4818 R. Droms
Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
April 2007
RADIUS Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute
Status of This Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract
This document defines a RADIUS (Remote Authentication Dial In User
Service) attribute that carries an IPv6 prefix that is to be
delegated to the user. This attribute is usable within either RADIUS
or Diameter.
Salowey & Droms Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 4818 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute April 2007
1. Introduction
This document defines the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute as a RADIUS
[1] attribute that carries an IPv6 prefix to be delegated to the
user, for use in the user's network. For example, the prefix in a
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute can be delegated to another node
through DHCP Prefix Delegation [2].
The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute can be used in DHCP Prefix
Delegation between the delegating router and a RADIUS server, as
illustrated in the following message sequence.
Requesting Router Delegating Router RADIUS Server
| | |
|-Solicit------------>| |
| |-Request------------------------>|
| |<--Accept(Delegated-IPv6-Prefix)-|
|<--Advertise(Prefix)-| |
|-Request(Prefix)---->| |
|<--Reply(Prefix)-----| |
| | |
DHCP PD RADIUS
The Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute [4] is not designed to support
delegation of IPv6 prefixes to be used in the user's network, and
therefore Framed-IPv6-Prefix and Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attributes may
be included in the same RADIUS packet.
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 RFC 2119 [3].
Salowey & Droms Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 4818 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute April 2007
3. Attribute Format
The format of the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | Reserved | Prefix-Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Prefix
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Prefix
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Prefix
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Prefix |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type
123 for Delegated-IPv6-Prefix
Length
The length of the entire attribute, in bytes. At least 4 (to
hold Type/Length/Reserved/Prefix-Length for a 0-bit prefix),
and no larger than 20 (to hold Type/Length/ Reserved/Prefix-
Length for a 128-bit prefix)
Reserved
Always set to zero by sender; ignored by receiver
Prefix-Length
The length of the prefix being delegated, in bits. At least
0 and no larger than 128 bits (identifying a single IPv6
address)
Note that the prefix field is only required to be long enough to hold
the prefix bits and can be shorter than 16 bytes. Any bits in the
prefix field that are not part of the prefix MUST be zero.
The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix MAY appear in an Access-Accept packet, and
can appear multiple times. It MAY appear in an Access-Request packet
as a hint by the NAS to the server that it would prefer these
prefix(es), but the server is not required to honor the hint.
Salowey & Droms Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 4818 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute April 2007
The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute MAY appear in an Accounting-
Request packet.
The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix MUST NOT appear in any other RADIUS
packets.
4. Table of Attributes
The following table provides a guide to which attributes may be found
in which kinds of packets, and in what quantity.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Request Accept Reject Challenge Accounting # Attribute |
| Request |
| 0+ 0+ 0 0 0+ 123 Delegated-IPv6- |
| Prefix |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
The meaning of the above table entries is as follows:
0 This attribute MUST NOT be present.
0+ Zero or more instances of this attribute MAY be present.
0-1 Zero or one instance of this attribute MAY be present.
1 Exactly one instance of this attribute MUST be present.
1+ One or more of these attributes MUST be present.
5. Diameter Considerations
When used in Diameter, the attribute defined in this specification
can be used as a Diameter AVP from the Code space 1-255, i.e., RADIUS
attribute compatibility space. No additional Diameter Code values
are therefore allocated. The data types of the attributes are as
follows:
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix OctetString
The attribute in this specification has no special translation
requirements for Diameter to RADIUS or RADIUS to Diameter gateways,
i.e., the attribute is copied as is, except for changes relating to
headers, alignment, and padding. See also RFC 3588 [5], Section 4.1,
and RFC 4005 [6], Section 9.
The text in this specification describing the applicability of the
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute for RADIUS Access-Request applies in
Diameter to AA-Request [6] or Diameter-EAP-Request [7].
The text in this specification describing the applicability of the
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute for RADIUS Access-Accept applies in
Diameter to AA-Answer or Diameter-EAP-Answer that indicates success.
Salowey & Droms Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 4818 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute April 2007
The text in this specification describing the applicability of the
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute for RADIUS Accounting-Request applies
to Diameter Accounting-Request [6] as well.
The AVP flag rules [5] for the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute are:
+---------------------+
| AVP Flag rules |
|----+-----+----+-----|----+
AVP | | |SHLD| MUST| |
Attribute Name Code Value Type |MUST| MAY | NOT| NOT|Encr|
---------------------------------|----+-----+----+-----|----|
Delegated-IPv6- 123 OctetString| M | P | | V | Y |
Prefix | | | | | |
---------------------------------|----+-----+----+-----|----|
6. IANA Considerations
IANA assigned a Type value, 123, for this attribute from the RADIUS
Attribute Types registry.
7. Security Considerations
Known security vulnerabilities of the RADIUS protocol are discussed
in RFC 2607 [8], RFC 2865 [1], and RFC 2869 [9]. Use of IPsec [10]
for providing security when RADIUS is carried in IPv6 is discussed in
RFC 3162.
Security considerations for the Diameter protocol are discussed in
RFC 3588 [5].
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[1] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson, "Remote
Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 2865, June
2000.
[2] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host
Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, December
2003.
[3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Salowey & Droms Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 4818 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute April 2007
9.2. Informative References
[4] Aboba, B., Zorn, G., and D. Mitton, "RADIUS and IPv6", RFC 3162,
August 2001.
[5] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko,
"Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003.
[6] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, "Diameter
Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005, August 2005.
[7] Eronen, P., Hiller, T., and G. Zorn, "Diameter Extensible
Authentication Protocol (EAP) Application", RFC 4072, August
2005.
[8] Aboba, B. and J. Vollbrecht, "Proxy Chaining and Policy
Implementation in Roaming", RFC 2607, June 1999.
[9] Rigney, C., Willats, W., and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS Extensions",
RFC 2869, June 2000.
[10] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the Internet
Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005.
Authors' Addresses
Joe Salowey
Cisco Systems, Inc.
2901 Third Avenue
Seattle, WA 98121
USA
Phone: +1 206.310.0596
EMail: jsalowey@cisco.com
Ralph Droms
Cisco Systems, Inc.
1414 Massachusetts Avenue
Boxborough, MA 01719
USA
Phone: +1 978.936.1674
EMail: rdroms@cisco.com
Salowey & Droms Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 4818 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute April 2007
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights 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; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat 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 implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Salowey & Droms Standards Track [Page 7]